Traveller-digest     Saturday, August 16 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1700



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: T41 Skills Draft Introduction: Steward Skill (longish)
Re:Femicide
Biowar, Disease and the Plague of Duskir
Re: T41 Skills Draft Introduction
re: Arghh <snip>
Re: Question for Marc & a second question
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1697
Re: Femicide
Re: FF&S2
Re: Ancient Genetic Engineering (was Traveller-digest V1997 #1687)
Re: yet more RoM TL bandwidth
Going TL-4 for a bit...

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 05:10:27 -0400
From: "Michael D. Peters" <Letterworks@Comten.com>
Subject: Re: T41 Skills Draft Introduction: Steward Skill (longish)

Traveller-digest wrote:

> Date: Fri, 15 Aug 97 20:19:18 -0500
> From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
> Subject: T41 Skills Draft Introduction: Steward Skill
>

<snip>

> Am I the only GM that uses the Steward skill as a DM when determining
> how
> many passengers you can book onto the ship?  I've never used Admin or
> Carousing for that purpose.  Stewards are in charge of making sure the
>
> life-support systems are equiped and in good working order.  They are in
> charge of food preperation, waste disposal, crew and passenger
> service/entertainment, cargo loading/unloading, and ship security. Whether
> Marc includes Steward into T4.1 or not, I'll be continuing to have it in
> the games I run.

Eris,You have capture the exact thing I was trying to say. I also
include most of the sub-skills you mention under the steward banner.
That's why I brought it up. Earlier on (weeks ago) the list some one was
asking about minor adventures to use during jumps. I use tasks and
accidents around the JOBS preformed by crew members for this type of
filler.

> About detailed/general skills, I guess I lean toward detailed but I
> understand the advantages of having a few general skills that cover broad
> areas of operation.  For example, we have an Engineering skill, we don't
> have Engineering Cascade:  Jump Drive, Maneuver Drive, Power Plant Cascade:
> Fusion, Fission, Internal Combustion.

I could go either way with this. The more a skill is cascaded (is that a
real word?) the more complex Character Gen becomes. After a while we
wind up with GURPS. While it's not a bad system and has a number of good
points when it comes to maknig up a "complete" character, it's
cumbersome.

> In that vane, though, why don't we have a Bridge skill?  In instead we have
> Pilot, Astrogator, Sensors, Communications...these are all starship Bridge
> skills and in most *realistic* services a Bridge Officer would get some
> training in all of them.

I have noticed this as well and have started using a skill I've called
"Watch Standing". I "issue" this as a default skill, 1/2 level per year
served aboard ship..."Refelects a general knowledge of ship bouard
operations. Typically a PC on watch can handle routine operation and
adjustments to ALL of the ship's systems and has the training to
recognize variations that require more skilled attention."...
Task: Stand Watch (time variable by schedule)
(Int+Watch Standing)+/- (mods) < Difficulty
a miss on the roll MIGHT NOT mean anything, or, the life support system
could be fouling. If it is then can the PC fix it themself or do they
need to call on the greater expertise of the STEWARD. (like how I fit
that in?)

> Of course, once upon a time the Gunnery Skill *was* a cascade..you had to
> choose Laser, Particle, Meson, Sandcaster, etc as a specific skill whenever
> you got Gunnery.
>
> I think it might be worth considering looking at Professions, in addition
> to Careers.  A Professional Spaceman would have certain skills (Vacc Suit,
> Survival:  Zero-G & Vacuum, & a Specialty Profession (Bridge, Engineer,
> Steward, Technician, Gunner) that have a number of skills) *all* at some
> minimum level.  A Professional Merchant would have Trader, Broker, Bribery,
> Admin, Streetwise, & Carousing.  I think we could define a number of
> Professions all with certain required skills. This wouldn't take the place
> of running a character through the career process, but it might be a good
> shortcut method of generating specific types of characters, and at least
> good guidelines for what skills a player should get for their characters.
>
> Just some thoughts,
>
> Eris
>
> - --
> - -----------------------------------------------------------
> eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)    using MR/2 ICE #245
> - -----------------------------------------------------------

Sorry to run on so long.Comments always welcome.
Mike Peters

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 97 10:30:00 GMT 
From: s.johnson107@genie.com
Subject: Re:Femicide

On Fri, 15 Aug 1997 05:46:14, kraehe@bakunin.hb.north.de Wrote...

>> The question is can their societies, heck their cultures SURVIVE
>> male to female ratios of 3 to 5 or more to 1?
> hey dont be on you high ross. some hundred years ago the
> christian church had findelkammern in any "kloster", where
> childs could be droped. And good will help them !
    Huh?????  Can I get a translation please?

> Of course most of them where female.
    While I'm not a feminist by any means, this is completely new situation in
Human history.  We've _never before_ had the kinds of societal imbalances in
the gender ratios that are in the inescapable future for these cultures.
Throughout human history we've been able to kill women without thought for the
consiquence because there were always more.  This is one of the reasons these
cultures are doing what they're doing.  They value boys and men more then girls
and women.  But it's from women that you get your next generation of
population!  So in a few years you're going to have militant countries filled
with desperate men surrounded by countries with more women then they have.
It's going to start wars like you wouldn't believe.  Or do you think armies of
100,000,000 men are all that easy to stop?

> Think about war as a kind of population control, for
> most civilisation. War mostly kills men, not women, so
> where is the population control. The population control
> only comes from one fact. That war make men a higher value
> than woman, and that women more of die a "sudden childs dead"
    You're very wrong, especially in modern warfare where cities filled with
civilians become targets of opportunity.  Look at the behavior of Iraq once
they'd occupied Kuwait.  In some places the soldiers started shooting women and
children at random for the "entertainment value" of watching them die.  And War
is not population control, if anything it's a population booster. ;)

Stephen

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 11:13:02 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phil McGregor)
Subject: Biowar, Disease and the Plague of Duskir

An interesting thing about epidemic diseases -- they don't (generally)
work the way that it *seems* to be assumed on this list.

=46irst of all, you need to understand the difference between an
epidemic and an endemic disease. Endemic diseases are generally those
that are not killers (or are not *normally* killers) -- though they
may start out that way. Think most of the childhood diseases --
measles, mumps, chicken pox etc. They have, in a sense, reached an
accommodation with their human hosts by not being *too* lethal. Thus
they are generally present in a human society at all times (though,
for example, with {AFAIR} Measles {maybe Mumps} they need a minimum
size population to be endemic ... 100k for Measles/Mumps, for
example).

Epidemic diseases are those (generally) that are lethal -- at least in
their initial appearance.

Think of them as being an ecological system -- the "successful"
diseases are the ones that do not kill off their hosts, do not make
them too ill to survive, and generally are not likely to cause major
numbers of deaths. In other words, they either mutate into less lethal
forms (which happens in some cases) or their human hosts develop
resistance which is inheritable to some degree (which happens in
others).

However, and this is an important point to note, the *really* lethal
diseases act too quickly for any immunity to evidence. Most such
diseases (from what I've read, *all* of them, but others may have more
accurate medical knowledge to refute this) are animal diseases that
cross the species barrier and there are several possibilities as a
result --=20

1) They appear, cause an indeterminate amount of deaths -- usually so
quickly that they kill off all of the population they can reach before
they spread -- and then disappear, having been, in a sense,
unsuccessful by being too lethal! (Such as O'nyong nyong fever -- seen
once in Africa in the 1970's and then disappeared, and there are other
examples as well, undoubtedly)

2) As per (1), but they return to their host animal population where
they regularly return to affect human populations when the conditions
become ripe.This is the case with diseases such as Bubonic plague.

3) They are *initially* relatively lethal, but immunity develops in
the host population *or* the only strain that "survives" is a not
normally lethal one.

This has important implications. The best diseases for Biowar are
therefore those that *no* human population has any immunity to. but
even those diseases are not hugely lethal --

Take two pandemics that we know of --

The Bubonic Plague of the 1300's -- it took repeated outbreaks over a
century to reduce the population of Europe by 1/3rd. Part of the
reason is that the fleas that carry the disease prefer Rats rather
than humans and only under the overcrowded and unsanitary conditions
of medieval europe did it have any real chance to spread. The recent
outbreak scare (1996?) in India was a joke to anyone who knew this --
it could have made inroads in India, but in the west? The general
standards of cleanliness and public health would have made it a
non-event. Of course, if it had mutated (as it does tend to) into the
*Pneumonic* version, which is spread by aerosol (from sneezing
"atishoo, atishoo, all fall down" has a much darker *real* meaning)
means, it is so lethal that it kills all (well, 96%+) within 24 hours,
that even with Jet airline travel it would not spread quickly enough
and widely enough (you have to be pretty close) to do any real damage.
Perhaps another 20 million deaths? Perhaps 100 million worldwide?
Probably not even close -- and most would be in the backward areas of
the world.

The Spanish Flu of 1918-19. This is *the* single most lethal Plague in
recorded history, and killed no more than 1-1.5% of world population
in around a year before dying out as quickly as it appeared. However,
the death rate was, in a sense, artificially inflated by a number of
factors that are not normally known -- for example, did you know that
the US Government made a *deliberate* decision to continue to ship
troops to Europe *even though they KNEW that the close conditions of
troopships would result in large numbers of deaths*. They did so to
send a message to their allies (as well as to their enemies) that they
were *serious* about fighting the war, *regardless of the casualties*.
Many more died in the trenches where they were kept in conditions that
would have relatively easily been avoided in civilian life.

=46or example, my father remembers the Flu epidemic (he was about five
or six) and remembers an aunt an uncle becoming ill, and then dying,
within 24 hours of first symptoms. He also remembers the precautions
that were mandated by the authorities locally to restrict the outbreak
- -- everyone had to wear a gauze mask in public; schools, churches,
picture theatres and other public places were closed; travel between
towns was restricted to those who had passes from the Police. It seems
to have worked, by and large.

Using diseases such as these as bioweapons, apart from the moral
considerations (and the Terrans were operating under UN auspices,
remember, which means that they have accepted that bioweapons are a
no-no -- all sorts of UN conventions say so!), is fraught with as much
danger to the users as to the targets.

The Plague of Duskir

Well, this is a real furphy -- the Plague is almost certainly the
Vilani "stab in the back" theory, I guess. There is no reason to
believe that the Vilani did not have enough medical knowledge of
diseases to have an idea of how to handle them (for reasons I'll
suggest below). It is *much* more likely that the social chaos
resulting from the collapse of the Ziru Sirka was the reason for any
die-back. By the way, it is my understanding that the die-back in
mesoamerica was due more to this factor than to disease *per se* --
those people were living so close to the bone that any disruption in
their normal economic patterns (mainly subsistence farmers) would
result in massive population losses -- lets look at the Roman Empire,
for example, the plagues that decimated the empire in the third
century are now thought to not have been as lethal as their results
would suggest. It has been suggested, and there is some evidence that
supports this, that Christianity received a great boost in this period
for the simple reason that Christians were the ones who, by and
large, provided simple aid to the sick -- preparing meals, providing
clean water, making sure they were warm and the like -- which
increased the survival rate greatly. Why? Well the Christains with
their idea of a pleasant afterlife, rewards therein (or actually
gaining entry thereto) for "charity" and the like meant they were
prepared to take risks that pagans were not ... the upshot is that
even simple help can increase survival rates markedly for even
epidemic diseases.

Now, the argument is that the Vilani were somehow more susceptible to
Terran diseases because of environmental factors -- to whit, having
been dumped on a planet with nothing biologically related to them.

OK, sounds reasonable? But, wait a minute! What about the Zhodani? The
Vargr? The other "minor" human races? Is there any evidence that any
of them suffered from anything like the "Plague of Duskir"? Or that
the Vilani were in any way affected by the diseases that they
inevitably carried -- even if it was a foreign strain of e coli! There
is no suggestion that Biowar (or even normal Terran diseases) has had
any effect on them. Yet they would, if the Vilani accounts are true --
and not exaggerations -- have been badly affected either then (or
later). There is no evidence of this, is there? Ergo, it seems, as I
suggested, that the "Plague" of Duskir was, as I said, the Vilani
version of Hitler's "Stab in the Back" ... their excuse for losing to
those "perfidious Terrans" ... rather than admitting that it was
superior Terran technolgy, tactics, industry and all the rest.

Well, that's my two cents worth anyway!

Phil
- -----------------------------------------
Phil McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au
Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)
Co-Author, Space Opera (FGU)
Author, Standard Role Playing (PGD)

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 12:29:37 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: T41 Skills Draft Introduction

Marc wrote:

>In a message dated 97-08-15 19:29:21 EDT, you write:
>
><< >One skill from th CT days that is not present in T4 is the Steward
> >skill.  >>
>
>And Steward will be in T4.1.
>
>Marc

Marc,

Please consider expanding this skill to cover the cargo operations. It
would be extremely nice to get the Norton 'Cargo Master' type character.
Looking at a CT type A2 for example, there are three mandatory crew
(Pilot/Nav, Engineer, and Steward/Medic). It would make sense for the
steward to be in charge of the cargo ops when pre-flighting the ship (IMO
of course!)

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"Omnia Mutantur Nihil Interit"  -  Sandman 'The Wake'
"Everything Changes, but nothing is truly lost" 

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 12:16:19 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: re: Arghh <snip>

Douglas Berry wrote:

>...and I remember when High Guard came out and we spent hours at the game
>store designing ships, awed at the new possibilities.  From the beginning,
>traveller has had a strong gearhead streak, your personal problems with
>that will not change the fact that a good percentage of us enjoy building
>things.

I would like to see a product at a similar level of simplicity to High
Guard that allows construction from TL9 through TL16, and up to 1 million
displacement tonnes. It is what I expected from the SSDS when I happily
bought starships.   <Sigh.>

Whatever goes in T4.1 needs to cover TL9 through TL15, not unlike the old
book 2. (I'd prefer a MT type system, but I don't think that will happen...)

On the design system notes - when the copies of EA and CSC sell out (which
I would think they would being good products) why not reissue them as a
hardback, and cut out VDS if its compatibility is in question? An you could
add pictures for CSC ;-)

At the moment, although I own starships and VDS and QSDS I still use High
Guard and convert with Rob Flammang's excellent system.

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"Omnia Mutantur Nihil Interit"  -  Sandman 'The Wake'
"Everything Changes, but nothing is truly lost" 

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 11:48:10 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: Question for Marc & a second question

Marc wrote (about Kenneth's question) :

>In a message dated 97-08-15 17:12:39 EDT, you write:
>
><< Question for you, Marc--if the new task system is to be Stat + Skill
> lvl, and skill levels are increased to a range of 1-15, then how is
> a Difficult task going to be obtained with 2.5D?
>  >>
>
>Does this question assume that the mid range for a skill is 7? Although it is
>possible for a skill level to reach 10 or higher, the typical skill level is
>not appreciably more than in CT.
>
>Assuming average Characteristic and Skill-2, then there is a 57% chance of
>success on a Difficult task. It seems to me half chance of success is
>difficult. Take twice as much time and the chance of success is 83%.

All the characters I've run through the T4.1 draft that Marc put out had
skill levels of 4 or less. There were at most 1 or 2 at skill-4, and a
couple of twos. Now, these characters were pseudo-random in generation (I
picked a few skills to slant them a certain way). I think that skills >5
will be rare, unless you allow players to powergame their generation. Which
I wouldn't as a GM.

One other thing:

Marc, the task statement is still mathematically incorrect. It should read

skill + stat > difficulty

to be correct.

Dom
.


- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"Omnia Mutantur Nihil Interit"  -  Sandman 'The Wake'
"Everything Changes, but nothing is truly lost" 

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 11:26:24 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phil McGregor)
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1697

On Fri, 15 Aug 1997 21:56:08 -0400, you wrote:

>Marc Miller... Jesus Christ, guy... if you are reading this, then you
>have GOT to understand that you have got to quit slavishly adhering to
>what the people on this digest are telling you. They have led you up the
>primrose path. T4 is fucked, broken, and incomprehensible to anyone NOT
>on the digest. Under their expert ministrations, you have produced a
>game system which will drive your up-&-coming market of gamers in their
>late teens away in droves. If you want IG to see another Christmas past
>this one, you must do three things and you must do them immediately:

Hear! Hear! That's exactly what *I* believe -- and 100% of the local
Traveller Gamers I know ... we're at the point where we genuinely
don't care when a new Traveller product comes out, look it over
carefully and then reject it as too flawed to use.

Its the reason I gave up doing Dark Star -- I had high hopes that T4
would go back to Trav's roots -- *Classic* Trave -- and forget the
abortions that were MTrav and TNE.

>1) Make Wildstar's QSDS the standard ship-building system. Extend it on
>either end tonnage-wise so that you can build anything from grav bikes
>to dreadnaughts, just as you could in MegaTraveller. Also extend it from
>TL's 9 to 15, so that you can build 90% of the hardware in the Traveller
>universe without being forced into using a hellishly complex design
>system -- that should be OPTIONAL. Right now it is MANDATORY. That is
>RETARDED.

Even QSDS is too complex in many ways, but I can (barely) live with it
- -- anyway, I can use bits of it along with CTrav design system while
ignoring most of it.

>2) Revamp FF&S 2 so that all the results are presented in QSDS stats
>WITHOUT any lame-assed 'conversions' and use terminology throughout
>which is NOT absent in the other supplements or contradictory to the
>language used in them. (Do you need a professional tech editor with some
>gaming experience? I'M available....)

Yes!!

>3) Offer the techies on this digest a small royalty to produce Excel
>spreadsheets for both PC & Macs so that ordinary folks can design
>individual FF&S 2 components, then plug them into QSDS. Put the
>spreadsheets on a CD-ROM and bundle it with the book. Do not charge more
>than $30 for the results. If you have to eat a bit of a loss to do it,
>tough cookies. IG is about where Apple is... the best product around
>mismanaged straight into the ground... and it desperately needs some
>triage.

This is a *MUST*. The game system is too effing complex to be usable
as is, even QSDS. I'd be prepared to pay for such -- I've got Greg
Porter's 3G3 Spreadsheet ... and it was well worth it. It turned 3G3
from a product that I admired but refrained from using due to
complexity to one that I will actually get around to using one of
these days when I get on with weapons tech for my current project!

>In the event that you can't tell, I've pretty much given up on T4. FF&S
>2 was to be the magic bullet tht would make everything OK, and I've been
>waiting for it for six months. Now I am being told that not only is it
>filled with high-tech meaningless slang that is inapplicable anywhere
>else within the game system, I am being told it's YOUR fault for not
>explaining this gearhead drivel and MY fault for not learning how to use
>it properly....

Haven't seen FF&S2, don't know that I'll bother to buy it based on the
problems it seems to have. And I don't know of anyone who is really
expecting it to solve any problems at all, or who is really rushing
out to pre-order it locally.

>I've got my entire Trav gaming group from high school waiting in the
>wings, waiting to hear when my military-oriented campaign is going to
>start up. I've got to tell them it ain't gonna happen, because I can't
>build anything and don't have an all-inclusive combat system to use it
>even if I did. You haven't lost one customer. You've lost five. Christ
>only knows how many time this scene is being repeated all over the U.S.

And in Oz.

>The original Traveller came in thin, floppy, user-friendly booklets that
>were inexpensive to buy and easy to read for your average-bright teen on
>an allowance. It would have been great to go back to that level of
>simplicity, with a more complex design/combat system hovering in the
>background for those who wanted to make use of it. Instead, we've got
>what we have... which is precisely zero. I don't understand how to build
>things using either of the custom ship design systems we have and no
>combat system to make use of the data they present. This is assinine and
>a blatant waste of time and money.

Exactly! Hear! Hear!

>I'll get flamed out of the water for daring to air my myriad
>exasperations on this digest, but I literally no longer care..... I did,
>as recently as a few days ago.... You can do what you want and listen to
>who you want. It's your game and your company and your legacy to the
>role-playing community that is going up in a cloud of frustration and
>failure. I quit.

At least you have one supporter! And there have been others posting in
a similar wise recently. Surely to ghu someone in design at Imperium
Games will actually get the message?

Phil
- -----------------------------------------
Phil McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au
Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)
Co-Author, Space Opera (FGU)
Author, Standard Role Playing (PGD)

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 03:48:11 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Re: Femicide

Douglas E. Berry wrote

> At 05:46 AM 8/15/97 +0000, you wrote:
> >Moin s.johnson107@genie.com,
> >
> >> The question is can their societies, heck their cultures SURVIVE male
> >> to female ratios of 3 to 5 or more to 1?
> >
> >       hey dont be on you high ross. some hundred years ago the
> >       christian church had findelkammern in any "kloster", where
> >       childs could be droped. And good will help them !
> >
> >       Of course most of them where female.
> 
> The difference being that the church then raised or placed these girls, who
> grew up and married.  In the areas under discussion, female children are
> being killed off.  What is goijg to happen in about 20 years when there is
> a huge varience in the normal 54-46 female/male distrubution?  My biggest
> fear is the social disruption as the hordes of men go looking for wives,
> and the find that they have to fight over them.

This problem should resolve itself due to basic economics.  As the
quantity supplied of an item [brides] is reduced while the demand for
the product [brides] remains constant the market clearing price for this
item will rise. I.E. if there are fewer women to marry those that are
there will command higher bride prices, this will alter the perceived
value of female children, and the market for female babies will regain
equilibrium.

Of course in real life it could take a while, and some social changes,
for this equilibria to be reached.

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 08:01:31 -0400
From: "John Watts" <jwatts@catt.com>
Subject: Re: FF&S2

>A space combat missle is expalined on pg 48.  You design the thrust agency
>on pg 65.  Each G of acceleration requires 1 G-hour per hour of
acceleration.

>One more time, NO RULES IN THIS BOOK.  Did you read the blurb on the >back
>before buying?  If not, cavet emptor!

No offense Leonard ( UPS is holding back the book from arriving at my FLGS
) but this does NOT sound like a book I'd want either.  I'll give it a
look-see, but it sounds to me like this entire concept is a waste of paper.
 If there are no game rules, then what exactly is the point of it?

John




It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion.
It is by the beans of Java that my thoughts acquire speed.
My hands begin to shake.  The shakes are a warning.
It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion.

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 04:00:57 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Re: Ancient Genetic Engineering (was Traveller-digest V1997 #1687)

Douglas E. Berry wrote

[snip]

>  I'll just pose a question
> here.. what about genetic diseases?  My cancer is genetic in nature (a
> result of bad coding for the lymphatic system), and I wonder if Yaskodray
> might have fixed the DNA of the moved humans, or if they have the same
> percentages of events like HD, Down's Syndrome, MD and the host of other
> problems that come from bad genetic expression.

Why would Yaskodray have bothered to fix the coding, this seems like too
much work to bother to do for slaves (even given that he understands
this code quite well).  If any of his human helpers/slaves got cancer he
could fix them easily with medicine of his TL.  Why bother to trim out
the chance of diseases you can fix with one miracle shot ?

In addition we know that minor races do not have better aging saves than
Solomani.  If they had had genetic problems snipped out they should
either receive a + to aging rolls, a + to their Endurance stats, or
both.

On the other hand maybe the Ancients did improve the genes of some
humans in some ways.  Perhaps this is why the Vilani have longer
lifespans.  If each servant lives longer your training cost per servant
per year is reduced since thay won't die off as rapidly requireing you
to train their children.

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 04:31:46 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Re: yet more RoM TL bandwidth

Harold Hale wrote

>    Another point on TL: the tech level rating system is for the use of
> ***referees*** and ***players*** to give them something to gauge what is
> being described to them in terms of a world's (or society's) overall
> technology in relation to others.  It is a number that exists *outside*
> the context of the Traveller universe.  No character, not even
> Grandfather would know that they are TL 10 or 15 or whatever.  Yes, I am
> aware that some Traveller and MMT publications list 'laser rifle-13' and
> 'handcomputer-11' but those numbers are for *your* reference--in the
> eyes of your character, they would just be a laser rifle and
> handcomputer.  While they would be aware that the laser rifle
> incorporates more advanced technology than the hand computer, they would
> not make statements like, "yeah, the rifle is two tech levels higher
> than the computer".

Harold it was always my impression that charecters in Traveller _did_
use the TL reference. IIRC in CT many adventures said thing like "the
library date on the planet Y says it had a UPP of B 686834-C".  I know I
have seen references in Traveller to charecters using the UPP
_which_includes_TL_.  How would the TL mean anything to the charecters
if TL was not standard terminology?

IIRC the Scout Service was the agency that used TL's. I think TNE's
Regency Sourcebook said that Scouts interdict planets with TL's less
than 5.  If the Scout Service did not use TL's how could this statement
have any meaning ?

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 08:36:35 -0400
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: Going TL-4 for a bit...

	Hm.  Leroy is discussing ROM TL again, Kenneth has just reiterated
to Marc how wonderful KB v.2 is, and Jay has probably triggered an entirely
new flamewar involving IG quality, freedom from gearhead oppression, and so
forth.  Good thing I'm going on vacation; it looks like armageddon is just
around the corner.

	My opinions, FWIW, on all of the above:

1) I don't care about ROM TL.

2) I like KB v.2 and use it.  It's an improvement over T4, that's for sure.

3) I like the complexity of FF&S1 and FF&S2 (although with the latter I'm
working with an incomplete playtester's draft so I can't fully exploit it).
Complexity permits me to maintain enough illusion of realism to keep my
inner hard-SF geek happy, and also add a great deal of flavour to my
campaign.  My players don't have to review my calculations when I describe
a 625,000 displacement ton airfoil airship drifting overhead like God's own
hang glider; hopefully, if I'm in a good descriptive narration groove they
can just sit back and go "Wow!  This puppy's going to make the Hindenburg
look like a fizzled squib!".

4) IG and IG's future:  Well, early management IG bit, second-gen
management are still kinda clueless in a lot of ways, and things still
aren't perfect or properly integrated.  I'm running a campaign using KB v.2
augumented with a lot of my own combat rules, set in Milieu 0, using gear
designed in SSDS, VDS, FF&S1 and FF&S2.  I routinely refer to some old MT
supplements Ross has.  Our group has bought several copies of the rulebook,
won Starships in a design contest, and bought Milieu 0, Emperor's Arsenal,
and CSC.  Players read M:0 for flavour, I use CSC and EA a lot, and
Starships we periodically look at and diss.  The main book we use for
chargen and the odd rule now and again when rules become strictly necessary.

	So basically, my game is a confused mish-mash of various systems
flying in close formation, and I'm loving every second of it.  However, a
nice integrated, bug-fixed, proofread system would IMHO be preferable.  So,
my take on T4 (as opposed to RDETMMHBRKBM:0T [RDE's Totally Mish-Mashed
Home-Brewed Really Kit-Bashed Milieu:0 Traveller]) is that I'm going to
wait for T4.1.  I'm satisfied with the Frankensteinian rules set that I've
thrown together in the short term.  However, I'm going to take a close,
very close look at T4.1 when it comes out.  If it looks good, I'm going to
buy it and use it.  And then I'll have a look at the other IG supplements
as they appear: second run of FF&S2 with the typos fixed, whatever the
combat system is published in, and so forth.  If they work, good.  If not,
I won't buy them.  I will still be able to get by.


	And I won't lose any sleep over IG.  Traveller (and RPG's in
general) are games; pleasant diversions.  I'm very glad that Marc one day
got inspired to start writing Traveller; a lot of good times for a lot of
people, including myself, have ensued (thanks, Marc!).  However, it's still
just a game, and one which I'm quite certain that I won't have nearly
enough time for in the future as I have a life, and one that's going to get
very busy in two weeks.  While I'll gladly stay up late to design the
latest Famille Spofulam crime against humanity, good sense, and good taste,
I can't really summon the mental energy to really get worked up enough to
seriosly flame people over Trav, or lose any sleep over the future of the
game.  If IG folds, my group and I will still have enough material for me
to work up another campaign, and we'll still be able to play it.  If we
take good care of the books (or scan them when they start dying), and are
still around 60 years from now in the same retirement home, we'll still be
able to play ( what with technical developments I think that Glenn and I
will have kitbashed significant changes to systems, design systems, maps,
and background though:)).  However, it'd be nice for IG to still be around
churning stuff out; it'd be useful.

	So that's my two cents.

	In the meantime, however, I'm going on vacation for a week in this
nice little cottage up on the Ile d'Orleans, down on the water.  Many fires
on the beach with my girlfriend snuggled up to me are in my immediate
future.  I will be back, although possibly via another ISP account as my
McGill student account is about to expire.  So have fun, play nice, and
chill out the lot of you :).

Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1700
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Saturday, August 16 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1701



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re:  E21 Revision 
Re: M:E21
Re: FF&S2
Re: S:AAB (was: Re: Mileu:E21)
Re: M:E21
Re: FF&S2
re: Arghh <snip>
Re: E21 Chronology
Re: 21st c. Terran technology, Vilani psychology, ...
Re: Question for Marc & a second question
The new task system
Re: T41 Skills Draft Introduction: Steward Skill
Re: FF&S2 Review (long)
Re:Traveller Books wanted 
Re: Question for Marc
Re: FF&S2
Re: M:E21
The d3 still lives..Drat!

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 21:27:18 +0800
From: Michael Bailey <mickb@opera.iinet.net.au>
Subject: Re:  E21 Revision 

I'm not really qualified to talk about the other nations, but as far as
Australia goes...

Population as at 1996 was 17.9 million, and growing at 1.2% per annum.
Expect growth rates to drop as migration and natural increase rates drop.
By 2100, at a wild guess, and discounting any major upheavals, I'd put the
population at around 35-40 million.  Australia is also the world's most
urbanised nation, with almost 92% of the population living in urban areas.

I do have to disagree with having a 'space infrastructure' rating of 1
(below Argentina?  sheesh!).  Granted, we don't have a huge infrastructure,
but some work goes on (work is going on at Woomera in conjunction with the
Japanese).  Given a leap of faith and some admittedly uncharacteristic will
by our typically spineless leadership, a large scale laaunch facility built
with the Japanese is not out of the question by 2100.  As a launch site,
northern Oz has some advantages:  reasonably close to the equator (10
degrees south at the tip of Cape York), lack of populated areas around if
things go wrong, one of the world's most stable political climates
(although that can change - who knows what'll happen), a technological
infrastructure in place already and (maybe someday) a robust and
diversified economy.  Well, I can live in hope can't I?

ObTrav:  in E21, Cape York may well be the site of an international launch
facility, perhaps heavily dominated by corporate concerns.  It'd make an
interesting setting, if espionage, double dealing an dcorporate
shennanigans were to your tastes.

Slainte,


Michael T. Bailey (mickb@opera.iinet.net.au)

"You drive", he said, "I think there's something wrong with me"
			Hunter S. Thompson - 'Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas'

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

Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 13:10:09 -0400
From: Eric Freitas <edf@atlantic.net>
Subject: Re: M:E21

At 03:05 AM 8/16/97 -0400, you wrote:
>John Watts writes:
>
>   Problem: if the "aliens from Roswell" are Vilani scouts, then why
>haven't we been frantically trying to develop space technology so that
>we can meet and stop their friends before they get to Earth with
>warships?
>
>   I object to first contact in the late 40s not because it isn't
>interesting, just kinda hard justify that's all.

	It wasn't really first contact, we could not prove absolutely that the
Russians might not disguise their most advanced test craft as an alien ship
(with Sumerian type writing inside).  After all, the Vilani just can't walk
up and ask for their ship back without raising BIG questions.  In addition
the Russians won't admit to sending a spy craft over the U.S..

	At best the ship would be disected for study, and the 'human' occupants
would be placed in cold storage.  After about five years of deliberation
the comittee(sp?) in charge of black projects would finally agree to
funding the construction and testing of both the engines and power supply.
The control systems would be beyond their understanding, but their studies
would reveal the basics: the devices are made of silicon, and switch
voltages on and off. (Assume they discover this by disecting a 50Amp Field
Effect Transistor in an SOT-23 package, which is beyond our own TL even now).

	I'm assuming that the Vilani vessel wasn't jump capable.  In which case,
the U.S. would have both a working, low output fusion plant and a low
thrust Heplar (or T Plate) drive.  The T Plate option could explain the
hyper-velocity vehicle's that fly over the LA area (usually on thursdays),
since there isn't a contrail seen in either case.  Hmm, maybe it could
explain what that IR camera on the shutle saw few years ago (you know:
maneuvering space ice)?  Say that it was Earth ships fending off Vilani
smugglers or Vargr raiders.  Hmm, isn't there an Ancients site on Mars?

	Well at any rate, the Roswell incident makes for great speculation in
Traveller.

Eric Freitas
edf@atlantic.net

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 12:50:36 -0400
From: "John Watts" <jwatts@catt.com>
Subject: Re: FF&S2

>Did *you* read *my* post? I pointed out that we had to use real units
>because IG didn't tell us what the "game" units would be.

<and then later in the post>

>That depends on the combat system that IG didn't give us

Maybe I'm noticing that the gate is open after the horse is gone here, but
I think we may have found the problem.

John



It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion.
It is by the beans of Java that my thoughts acquire speed.
My hands begin to shake.  The shakes are a warning.
It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion.

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 12:50:05 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: Re: S:AAB (was: Re: Mileu:E21)

Matti Laakso writes:

>>    Evidently sour grapes because a Finnish squadron gets whacked
>> in an episode of S:AAB...
>
>        Wow! I thought I only missed one episode (the last one!).

   Now see, listen to your friends and you miss out!  :-)

   The epsiode in question was the two-parter that featured the "Super
Chig" fighter.

>        No, don't think it's sour grapes, most of the people know watched 
>one or two episodes and then gave up on the series. IMO S:AAB is a 
>showcase of how _not_ to  make a successful SF series.

   I'm afraid that S:AAB would have been much better off had it been
syndicated and never saw network TV (shown here on the Fox network). 
Star Trek taught that lesson years ago.  There are just too many
pressures associated with dealing with network broadcast here (mostly
involving money) for a worthwhile sci-fi TV series to be made for a TV
network.

   BTW, before anyone chimes in, 'X Files' is *not* sci-fi.  You might
make a case that some episodes are sci-fi horror, but that is not the
overall theme.

   I will admit that initially, S:AAB was rather dark (perhaps too much
so, which may be why it didn't catch on in Finland) and grittier than
most people were used to (ditto--too much Dr. Who brainwashing).  If you
stuck around for the entire run, subtle changes were made to the story
that "lightened" it up a bit and made it more optimistic (it appeared
that the humans might just be able to prevail in the end).

>        Anyways, Star Trek (in all of its multi-tentacled, horrifying 
>incarnations) and Babylon 5, and even Earth 2 (way too new age for 
>me, though) are far more popular in Finland than S:AAB ever was.

   Babylon 5, Star Trek: DS 9 and ST: Voyager are syndicated here in the
U.S. (yes, Voyager appears on the UPN network, but few people get that
on cable, and UPN was launched in part to feature Voyager, not vice
versa).  There are plans to take Bab 5 to a network (TNT) here in the
States--I predict dire consequences when that happens, unless the deal
is similar to the one Voyager has now (small network w/syndication). 
Earth 2 was featured on network TV here and died the usual sci-fi series
death (I heard rumors of possible syndication, but nothing came of it as
far as I know).

   The Roddenbury Rule still applies: If you want to do sci-fi on TV, do
it in syndication.

Regards,

Harold

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 13:04:07 -0400
From: "John Watts" <jwatts@catt.com>
Subject: Re: M:E21

>Problem: if the "aliens from Roswell" are Vilani scouts, then why
>haven't we been frantically trying to develop space technology so that
>we can meet and stop their friends before they get to Earth with
>warships?

Again, with the " conspiracy theory " theme, maybe we have and the public
just isnt finding out.  < and no, I dont really believe this is happening,
but I believe it has potential for being an interesting game background >. 


Maybe we could only salvage parts for computers and cds .......

In the campaign I've been running for years, the Roswell crash was a Vilani
scout ship and everything possible from it was then reproduced in the hope
that the vessel could be reproduced.  It could not.  However, the tech
drawings and so forth survive until the Terrans could build a jump drive
based on the Vilani ship.  I always used this as an explanation as to why
the Terrans used jump for interplantary use at first and not intersolar.

I know its a bit difficult to justify, but it is fun and thats what counts
right?

I've always had it this way in the campaign I'm running  ( as well as the
Tunguska blast being yet another downed vessel ).  I realize that it is far
fetched, but sometimes those ideas make the best backgrounds.  

John


It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion.
It is by the beans of Java that my thoughts acquire speed.
My hands begin to shake.  The shakes are a warning.
It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion.

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 09:55:55 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: FF&S2

At 08:01 AM 8/16/97 -0400, you wrote:

>>A space combat missle is expalined on pg 48.  You design the thrust agency
>>on pg 65.  Each G of acceleration requires 1 G-hour per hour of
>acceleration.
>
>>One more time, NO RULES IN THIS BOOK.  Did you read the blurb on the >back
>>before buying?  If not, cavet emptor!
>
>No offense Leonard ( UPS is holding back the book from arriving at my FLGS
>) but this does NOT sound like a book I'd want either.  I'll give it a
>look-see, but it sounds to me like this entire concept is a waste of paper.
> If there are no game rules, then what exactly is the point of it?

Well, first of all, that was me you quoted, not Leonard.

The point of FFS2 is to be able to design all sorts of ships, vehicles, and
gadgets for your Traveller campaign.  That's it.  The original FFS copy
read something like "other games give you a catalog, we give you the factory."

FFS2 is not an easy product to use, but if you perservere you end up with
amazing results.  Probably the best thing about the whole concept is that
you get away from generic "autopistols" and "Free Traders".. You can have a
GT CombatMaster in your holster as you pilot your CBW "Roland" class Far
Trader.

FFS is a tool to allow a greater variety in your game.


- --
+------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry         dberry@hooked.net   |
| Gearhead & Planetologist, Traveller since 1977 |
|     Inquistor Magnus, Royal Commission for     |
|               Canon Correctness                |
|         http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|************************************************|
| "I believe in my heart that all astromoners    |
|  should be forced to go outside on summer      |
|  nights, just to admire the sky."  -Carl Sagan |
+------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 09:45:06 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: re: Arghh <snip>

At 12:16 PM 8/16/97 +0100, Dom wrote:
>Douglas Berry wrote:
>
>>...and I remember when High Guard came out and we spent hours at the game
>>store designing ships, awed at the new possibilities.  From the beginning,
>>traveller has had a strong gearhead streak, your personal problems with
>>that will not change the fact that a good percentage of us enjoy building
>>things.
>
>I would like to see a product at a similar level of simplicity to High
>Guard that allows construction from TL9 through TL16, and up to 1 million
>displacement tonnes. It is what I expected from the SSDS when I happily
>bought starships.   <Sigh.>

I would hazard a guess that this is the role that QSDS fills..  a simple
yet fulfiling design sequence for those who don't enjoy number crunching
with FFS.

While I have great memories of HG, I strongly prefer the less generic feel
of the modern design sequences.

>Whatever goes in T4.1 needs to cover TL9 through TL15, not unlike the old
>book 2. (I'd prefer a MT type system, but I don't think that will happen...)

I think that the latest revision of QSDS needs to go in, with as many
packages as possible.  Perhaps some of us gearheads could write up QSDS
articles for the Journal?

The important thing is that whichever system is used, the end result ship
stays the same.. No matter how it was designed, the stats all read in the
standard format.

>On the design system notes - when the copies of EA and CSC sell out (which
>I would think they would being good products) why not reissue them as a
>hardback, and cut out VDS if its compatibility is in question? An you could
>add pictures for CSC ;-)

I'd like to see something like that happen next summer, to be honest, I'm
getting a little tired of having to re-buy product.

>At the moment, although I own starships and VDS and QSDS I still use High
>Guard and convert with Rob Flammang's excellent system.

Whatever works best for you!
- --
+------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry         dberry@hooked.net   |
| Gearhead & Planetologist, Traveller since 1977 |
|     Inquistor Magnus, Royal Commission for     |
|               Canon Correctness                |
|         http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|************************************************|
| "I believe in my heart that all astromoners    |
|  should be forced to go outside on summer      |
|  nights, just to admire the sky."  -Carl Sagan |
+------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 13:10:28 -0400
From: Daniel Ray Lane <drlane@pinn.net>
Subject: Re: E21 Chronology

Harold makes an excellent point here, which I think needs to be
addressed.

It seems obvious that the US will not make it to Mars anytime sooner than
2018.  This is due to political and fiscal considerations.  Popular support
for planetary exploration doesn't exist on the level required for Congress
to fund it.  The US government is currently interested in balancing the
budget to ensure we don't dig ourselves deeper into debt or bankrupt the
nation.  (At least the USG is interested in making it seem like they're 
trying to do so.)  Sadly, this is not the climate for expenditures on space 
exploration.

Does canon then require that we adhere to a badly dated timeline?  I believe
that for the sake of continuity, canon should be adhered to to avoid 
invalidating previous materials, but I don't want to play in a SF game that
is fantasy.  I'll play Rolemaster instead.  That's why I don't even think 
about playing Twilight 2000 anymore (now Armor 21 would have been a 
different matter).  For Traveller to remain "HARD SF," its future history
must be plausible.  UNSCA isn't going to happen soon and I believe that 
a new future history, suitably vague for the next 25 years ("wars and wars 
and rumours of wars") should be constructed.  UNSCA should/could be there
but should be deemphasized.  Once real money is on the table, the US
can be counted on to ignore anything the US says.  I'm not proud of that
fact, but I perceive it to be the reality of the situation (and I'm a Yank).

There are other areas in Traveller that MUST be refined in order to keep
the game apace with current technology.  Future technologies (for example,
6MW/m3 TL15 fusion Rx) won't be affected, as within reason, we can tweak 
the future efficiencies to make them consistent with previous pubs.  

But current tech should match current capabilities.

I don't agree that TL is merely a Referee tool.  I used too, but after
years of reading Traveller stuff, especially Regency Sourcebook, I
concluded that the Imperium does numerically gage local TLs.  I believe 
that the Vilani imposed the first system of this type, much along the 
lines of the Major/Minor Race thing.  An artificial construct designed 
to socially supress other races by subordinating their technological 
developments to the one technology the Vilani reigned supreme in, Jump 
Tech. It was in the interests of the RoM to perpetuate this system, 
and in the interests of the 3I to do so as well.

Like many such numerical measures (e.g. GNP, Unemployment%), these
are tools designed to reflect certain data.  Humans measure things
when it benefits them.  

A better measure of TL is closely coordinated with energy production,
but all regimes of techology should be measured.  From these figures,
a composite or "figure of merit" TL can be developed.

- -Dan Lane

- -Dan Lane

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 97 18:51 BST-1
From: nicklaw@cix.compulink.co.uk (Nicholas Law)
Subject: Re: 21st c. Terran technology, Vilani psychology, ...

In-Reply-To: <199708140835.EAA03179@phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM>

Garry Ward asked, 14 Aug 1997:

> True, they could not build anything larger than a cruiser, but
> what was theFirst Imperiums tonnage classifications for ships?
> Supplement 9, fightingships of the Imperium gives us the THIRD
> Imperium's classifications, butwhat were the FIRST Imperium's? A
> 3I cruiser could be in the same tonnageclass as a 1I  destroyer.

This was something I had to give some thought to when planning an 
adventure where the players discover an derelict Vilani warship. 

In the good old days of yore, ie Book 5 High Guard, there was a 
tech level limit on the size of computer you could install in a 
ship, which in turn imposed a limit on the hull size (I know this 
must all sound unbearably primitive to all you FF&S fans, but such 
were conditions then). At tech level 11, that of the First 
Imperium Vilani, the maximum displacement was 50,000 tons, so a 
1st Imperium dreadnought would be the size of a 3rd Imperium 
strike cruiser. 

Things were even worse for the Earthmen. At tech level 10, as they 
were at the start of the Interstellar Wars (recapping briefly for 
all those who have chosen not to wade through the sixty thousand 
lines of text devoted to Solomani tech levels that have been 
posted to the TML) the maximum ship size was 10,000 tons -- those 
Vilani must have laughed when they saw the pride of Earth's 
''national squadrons under a tenuous fleet control by UNSCA'' 
coming for them, forgetting that it's not how big it is that's 
important, but how you use it.

Nick

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

Date: Tue, 12 Aug 1997 18:28:59 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: Question for Marc & a second question

> All the characters I've run through the T4.1 draft that Marc put out had
> skill levels of 4 or less. There were at most 1 or 2 at skill-4, and a
> couple of twos. Now, these characters were pseudo-random in generation (I
> picked a few skills to slant them a certain way). I think that skills >5
> will be rare, unless you allow players to powergame their generation. Which
> I wouldn't as a GM.

In this case, I'll just keep using KBv2.0, with Marc's new T4.1 
chargen system, and with my old CT stuff, and everybody's happy.

I was hoping with T4.1 that I could use it as is, without beefing up 
skills through KBv2.0.  I was hoping I could moth ball KBv2.0, and 
just use the rules straight out of the book--as it should be.  I 
guess it is just not going to be that way. 

Kenneth.

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 10:58:23 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: The new task system

Just read the draft of the new task system (thanks Marc), and I'll be the
first to say that it is an incredible improvement over T4.  Lots of
examples, clear statements, and a table breaking down the sucess
probabilities for each of the difficultly levels (a very helpful design aid.)

This is looking better and better.
- --
+------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry         dberry@hooked.net   |
| Gearhead & Planetologist, Traveller since 1977 |
|     Inquistor Magnus, Royal Commission for     |
|               Canon Correctness                |
|         http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|************************************************|
| "I believe in my heart that all astromoners    |
|  should be forced to go outside on summer      |
|  nights, just to admire the sky."  -Carl Sagan |
+------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Tue, 12 Aug 1997 18:28:57 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: T41 Skills Draft Introduction: Steward Skill

> Am I the only GM that uses the Steward skill as a DM when determining how
> many passengers you can book onto the ship?

Nope, you're not.  I use Steward for a lot of things too.  CT trained 
my that way.

Kenneth.

 

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

Date: Tue, 12 Aug 1997 18:28:58 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: FF&S2 Review (long)

Thanks for the review of FF&S2, John.  I'll probably go out and buy 
it now.

Question for you:  I was hoping to have a section on personal armor.  
I want to create the CT era armor types in the T4 game system--you 
know, Combat Armor, Cloth, etc.

Is there a section in FF&S2, like there was in the TNE version of 
this book, to create personal armor types?

Kenneth.

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

Date: Tue, 12 Aug 1997 18:29:00 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
Subject: Re:Traveller Books wanted 

> Alas, it is no more "available" than the others....I've searched long
> and hard for WBH.  Nobody ever seems to be willing to part with it (and
> rightly so when one observes how useful it is via all the discussion of
> world building on the TML) 

Hey, I didn't say it was going to be easy!  I was just letting him 
know that the WBH would be a better find than the two separate books.

 Maybe someday archeologists will dig up a
> long lost cache of 100 WBHs so those of us not forunate enough to own it
> can snap them up.  Until then Scott, myself, and many others can only
> dream.......

Heck, if the archeologists found it, you can bet they'd keep it--it's 
that good of a book!

Kenneth.

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

Date: Tue, 12 Aug 1997 18:28:56 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: Question for Marc

> Does this question assume that the mid range for a skill is 7?

Yes, I was assuming that skills--ranging from 1-15--would average 7.

 Although it is
> possible for a skill level to reach 10 or higher, the typical skill level is
> not appreciably more than in CT. 
> 
> Assuming average Characteristic and Skill-2, then there is a 57% chance of
> success on a Difficult task. It seems to me half chance of success is
> difficult. Take twice as much time and the chance of success is 83%.

I see.  So, you are not really changing the skill/task system that T4 
currently has?  I thought that you had indicated that you were doing 
this--increasing the value of skills.

The system in T4.1 will be the same we have now, except for your 
changes to the difficulty codes?

Kenneth.

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 11:24:47 -0700
From: Scott Ellsworth <Scott_Ellsworth@alumni.hmc.edu>
Subject: Re: FF&S2

>>A space combat missile is explained on pg 48.  You design the thrust agency
>>on pg 65.  Each G of acceleration requires 1 G-hour per hour of
>acceleration.
>
>>One more time, NO RULES IN THIS BOOK.  Did you read the blurb on the >back
>>before buying?  If not, cavet emptor!
>
>No offense Leonard ( UPS is holding back the book from arriving at my FLGS
>) but this does NOT sound like a book I'd want either.  I'll give it a
>look-see, but it sounds to me like this entire concept is a waste of paper.
> If there are no game rules, then what exactly is the point of it?

I would not say "NO RULES", rather, I would say "Design sequences only - NO
RULES to use the resulting products in combat."  It is a very useful book,
as it gives the sequences and the assumptions behind them for a number of
common traveller technologies, which lets people like me design exactly the
ship I want, or the tank I want.  As people do this, they often post the
resulting designs, which then can be codified in a table for people who do
not want this.  There are a lot of useful pieces of data hiding in here,
but it is not a book on starship combat.  It does include a very good
section on how to design such a thing in general, which points out that you
do need to know the mission of the vessel and your resources.

I read FF&S2, liked it, and thought it was one of the most useful books I
could have had added to my game.  One of my players agrees, as she also
designs ships, etc., for fun.  Another player wants background material,
and finds ti a useless supplement.  Different strokes.

In the game two weeks ago, one of my players had a hydroponics as a hobby.
The player wanted to grab a whole lot of gear for their scout vessel.  This
turned out to be fortuitous, as they are playing the Long Way Home, in
which they might face a two+ year voyage home.  With FF&S2, I can tell the
player exactly what the hydroponics gear they bought can do.

This is not minor, BTW, I have issues like that come up all the time in the
game.  (How powerful a computer can I put in my suitcase?  Can I create a
claymore made of superdense?  Will the plasma jet from the grav car go
through my armor?)  This is a book that lets me, the DM answer the
questions in a consistent way.

Note: I find that most SF game's equipment lists look exactly like the
magic items list in the DMs guide, without a single helpful chart for items
that runs from the tech level the players are at to the tech level the
world they are on is at.  How in the hell am I supposed to handle "Magic
Physics" when my players are as smart as I am.  I can make stuff up, but
then I run into consistency problems later.  I would rather have the
underlying system fairly well laid out, which FF&S does, and then add in my
interpretations as need be.

Not all groups have players as clever and inventive in technology as mine,
from the response to this book, but it seems that many do.  I have seen
half a dozen different groups, and every group had at least one person who
could tweak a system to their benefit, and who did it in character.  This
is the kind of book that lets you stay ahead.  They can still tweak, but
then you and they are at least working with the same rules.

Now, it is the case, that one of my players likes table driven starship
design - QSDS is just about perfect, but he would like something perhaps
even a bit simpler.  I created such a thing - QSDS tables for ships from
100 to 2000 tons with 1, 2, and 3 jump, and 1,2, 3, and 4 G TL 11 and 12
drives in them.  I also added special power plants and crew quarters to
each weapons, so he can assemble a ship literally as a small collection of
black boxes, as long as it is in one of the twenty sizes and uses one of
the standard armaments packages.

I suspect there are others who want to go this way, and I also suspect that
QSDS will be updated where need to take into account the new rules.  From
what I have seen, there will not be major tweaks needed, but there will be
minor ones.

I do not think this is yet another IG foul up.  I do think the overly short
playtest and the typesetting problems are.  The typesetting detracts form
the book, but I have not found any major flaws in the copy.

If you ever design ships, or have techie players, this one is worth a read.
It may not form the core of your use, as it just screams out for the
equivalent of Starship Assembly Line (a most useful Java program, written
by James Dempsey), that implements it, but it is still fun.

Scott

- -------
Scott_Ellsworth@alumni.hmc.edu.  http://users.deltanet.com/~fuz/
"You die, she dies, EVERYbody dies" - Heavy Metal
"When a great many people are unable to find work, unemployment results" -
Calvin Coolidge, attrib. by Stanley Walker, City Editor, p. 131 (1934)

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 14:34:46 -0400
From: Daniel Ray Lane <drlane@pinn.net>
Subject: Re: M:E21

> The control systems would be beyond their understanding, but their studies
> would reveal the basics: the devices are made of silicon, and switch
> voltages on and off. (Assume they discover this by disecting a 50Amp Field
> Effect Transistor in an SOT-23 package, which is beyond our own TL even now).
> 

> thrust Heplar (or T Plate) drive.  The T Plate option could explain the
> hyper-velocity vehicle's that fly over the LA area (usually on thursdays),
> since there isn't a contrail seen in either case.  Hmm, maybe it could
> explain what that IR camera on the shutle saw few years ago (you know:
> maneuvering space ice)? 

An interesting post.  What is the source for the 50 Amp FET in the SOT-23 
package?  (BTW, I'm not familiar with the acronynm "SOT." What does it stand 
for?)

Just because the US may have "black project" vehicles doesn't imply we
received the tech from offworld. Quantum mechanics established the 
theoretical framework for semiconductors a long time before 1947.  Why
do so many people want to assume that humans can't figure anything out
themselves?  Todays tech can be clearly traced back over 300 years, 
all the way back to Watt, Newton, Leibnitz and others. Is there objective
evidence to the contrary or are people just so ignorant of science and
technology that they want magical hand-me-downs instead?

Anyone who knows any different, plese e-mail me privately as this is
falling off-topic.

- -Dan Lane

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 97 13:39:32 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: The d3 still lives..Drat!

The following is my personal opinion. I'm not looking to start another TASK
WARS thread. ;->

On 08/16/97 at 11:48 AM,  SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com> said:

>><< Question for you, Marc--if the new task system is to be Stat + Skill
>> lvl, and skill levels are increased to a range of 1-15, then how is
>> a Difficult task going to be obtained with 2.5D?

DRAT! DRAT! I for one won't be using the d3. Having a single half die in
the middle of a d6 progression is jarring and (for me) unacceptable. Ok,
call me weird, d10's, d20's, even dF's I'll use, but not d3's.

>>Does this question assume that the mid range for a skill is 7? Although it is
>>possible for a skill level to reach 10 or higher, the typical skill level is
>>not appreciably more than in CT.

The number of skills and the levels of those skill is going to be too low
for me.  That's OK though, I'm going to have to rewrite the entire
character generation sequence anyway to get the effects I'm looking for.

>All the characters I've run through the T4.1 draft that Marc put out had
>skill levels of 4 or less. There were at most 1 or 2 at skill-4, and a
>couple of twos. 

Same here, *too* few skills and levels *too* low unless you keep that
abomination (d3) at difficult.

>One other thing:

>Marc, the task statement is still mathematically incorrect. It should read

>skill + stat > difficulty

>to be correct.


Numbers in parenthese used as examples:

Task succeeds if...Difficulty(3d6) <= Stat(7) + Skill(3)

That's now I'm going to write it, but

Task succeeds if...Stat(7) + Skill(3) >= Difficult(3d6)

works too.


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

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1701
***********************************
Traveller-digest      Sunday, August 17 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1702



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

M:E21 | Prepare to be Assimilated
Re: Going TL-4 for a bit...
FF&S2 Personal Armor
Re: yet more RoM TL bandwidth
Re: E21 Chronology
Re:  E21 Revision 
Bloodwell Incident.
re: Arghh <snip>
Query?!
Likely FF&S2 Error and a Question (Fuel Rates)
Re: Query?!
Re: T41 Skills Draft C Carousing
Re:T41 Chargen
RE:T41 Skills Draft A Armorer
Re: E21 Chronology
Re: Asia in Traveller
RE:Genetic Diseases?
Re: Query?!
Re: Question for Marc & a second question
Re: Femicide
Re: T41 Skills Draft Introduction
Re: Bloodwell Incident.
Re: M:21C; I-Wars
Re: M:E21
Re: E21 Chronology
Re: Femicide

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 97 12:24:56 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: M:E21 | Prepare to be Assimilated

On 08/16/97 at 03:05 AM,  hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale) said:

>>I love this.  Of course, I'm still all for the Roswell crash being a Vilani
>>scout ship too.  

>   Problem: if the "aliens from Roswell" are Vilani scouts, then why
>haven't we been frantically trying to develop space technology so that we
>can meet and stop their friends before they get to Earth with warships?

>   I object to first contact in the late 40s not because it isn't
>interesting, just kinda hard justify that's all.

<FNORD> If you want the conspiracy to end all conspiracies, then the
"aliens from Roswell" were Vilani scouts, and the push to develop missile
technology during the late 40's and early 50's *was* in response to the
possible arrival of "their friends" with warships.

Then in the late 57 they arrived.  Not with warships, but with ship loads
of "Sociological Adjustment Agents" who infiltrated the infrastructure of
the major nations with the goal of "preparing Earth for eventual
integration into the Imperium."  

By the late 60's, they had toned down the space-race by convincing the
"powers that be" that it was just too hard, too expensive, too politically
difficult to continue to push into space.  They were behind the development
of Star Trek and it's, "friendly human looking" aliens. They moved us from
"War of the Worlds" to "My Favorate Martian" in just a few years.

In the middle 70's a team of deep cover agents (lead by Marc Miiler)
working in Normal, IL, produced a roleplaying game called Traveller that
appealed to the brightest and most creative young of the minor race on
Terra.  It's goal was prepare the next generation of young Terrans for what
was to come.

After 30 years of direct manipulation, they have effectively delayed the
solomani "breakout" into the solar system, so as to make us accept our role
as a "minor race" in their Empire.  They have broken up one major nuclear
power and softened the other, to make it less likely that we will resist
*too* much.  They have firmly planted the idea of "human looking
alien=good", "buggish looking alien=evil" (I wonder why *that* is) in the
minds of the solomani.

How much longer before we are fully prepared for integration?  <FNORD>

BTW, it's safe to tell you all this, because you won't believe..now.
However, you will remember, and when the time comes will accept and embrace
your future.


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

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 18:23:18 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: Re: Going TL-4 for a bit...

Roderick Darroch Elliott writes:

>        And I won't lose any sleep over IG.  Traveller (and RPG's in
>general) are games; pleasant diversions.  I'm very glad that Marc one day
>got inspired to start writing Traveller; a lot of good times for a lot of
>people, including myself, have ensued (thanks, Marc!).  However, it's still
>just a game, and one which I'm quite certain that I won't have nearly
>enough time for in the future as I have a life, and one that's going to get
>very busy in two weeks.  While I'll gladly stay up late to design the
>latest Famille Spofulam crime against humanity, good sense, and good taste,
>I can't really summon the mental energy to really get worked up enough to
>seriosly flame people over Trav, or lose any sleep over the future of the
>game.  If IG folds, my group and I will still have enough material for me
>to work up another campaign, and we'll still be able to play it.  If we
>take good care of the books (or scan them when they start dying), and are
>still around 60 years from now in the same retirement home, we'll still be
>able to play ( what with technical developments I think that Glenn and I
>will have kitbashed significant changes to systems, design systems, maps,
>and background though:)).  However, it'd be nice for IG to still be around
>churning stuff out; it'd be useful.

   Every so often somebody turns a light on in this place and gives it
perspective.  Thanks Roderick.

Regards,

Harold

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 18:47:57 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Macpherson <john35@wharton.upenn.edu>
Subject: FF&S2 Personal Armor

"Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com> said:
>Thanks for the review of FF&S2, John.  I'll probably go out and buy
>it now.
	Good.  I don't think you'll be disappointed.

>Question for you:  I was hoping to have a section on personal armor.
>I want to create the CT era armor types in the T4 game system--you
>know, Combat Armor, Cloth, etc.
	Sorry, this isn't in FF&S2.  Hopefully, there will be an FF&S3, 
or at least a series of JTAS articles, that cover this and other topics 
like walker suspensions, wet navies, robots, etc.

- -JM

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 18:48:41 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: Re: yet more RoM TL bandwidth

Peter Newman writes:

>Harold it was always my impression that charecters in Traveller _did_
>use the TL reference. IIRC in CT many adventures said thing like "the
>library date on the planet Y says it had a UPP of B 686834-C".  I know I
>have seen references in Traveller to charecters using the UPP
>_which_includes_TL_.  How would the TL mean anything to the charecters
>if TL was not standard terminology?

   It was always my impression that TL started out in CT as something
that was intented as a referee/player tool, and that if any handwaving
attempts were made later to make it into something else, they were not
what was originally intended.

   When you think about it, how in the heck would a Vilani/Terran/Sylean
committee be able to determine something was TL 13+, when other than a
few mysterious devices left behind by the Ancients, there are no points
of reference to gauge TL?  So you say that TL was thought up by scouts
of the Third Imperium.  OK, how do they gauge what TL is appropriate for
the invention of the Relativity Rifle?  Is it TL 17 or 25 (the correct
answer according to MT's RC is 21)?

   My point is that a TL scale that assigns a number to a world works
fine from the *character's* perspective so long as you are looking
backward technologically speaking, but would fall apart rapidly if you
are trying to project forward.  That's why the TL scale is better
thought of as a referee/player tool--it works both forwards and
backwards.

Regards,

Harold

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 08:17:42 +0730
From: kenji@accessone.com (Kenji Schwarz)
Subject: Re: E21 Chronology

Dan Lane wrote:

>Once real money is on the table, the US
>can be counted on to ignore anything the US says.

Pithy insight, worthy of de Tocqueville... hope it wasn't a typo on your
part. <G>

Kenji Schwarz
kenji@accessone.com

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

Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 23:12:32 -0400
From: Eric Freitas <edf@atlantic.net>
Subject: Re:  E21 Revision 

At 09:27 PM 8/16/97 +0800, you wrote:
>with the Japanese is not out of the question by 2100.  As a launch site,
>northern Oz has some advantages:  reasonably close to the equator (10
>degrees south at the tip of Cape York), lack of populated areas around if
>things go wrong, one of the world's most stable political climates
>(although that can change - who knows what'll happen), a technological
>infrastructure in place already and (maybe someday) a robust and
>diversified economy.  Well, I can live in hope can't I?

You should read "The Gatekeepers" by Daniel Graham, Jr. (ISBN 0-671-87716-x).
It's a great book that portrays a disguised MacDonal Douglas as building and
operating their Delta Clipper launch vehicles in blatant disregard of the 
US government.  The US declines to pay for the ship(s) and MD decides to
launch from Cape York.

It's a good story and I like the Delta Clipper concept. (I've heard all the 
arguments why it won't work, but it appears that LM X33 is going to be an
operational nightmare (IMNSHO).  LM only got the X33 contract because their
ship already exists in a black program).

Eric Freitas
edf@atlantic.net

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 01:14:35 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Bloodwell Incident.

A question for all you CT crinklies! ;-)
Was the Bloodwell incident ever written up beyond the quote below?

Extract from Twilight's Peak:
<<Bloodwell Incident (1106 update, A3): The Bloodwell was a merchant trader
in the 1000 displacement ton class belonging to Oberlindes Lines and
generally assigned to the Regina/Regina ro Pandrin/Uthe route. Lost with
all hands and passengers to Imperial naval action on 347-1105 when mistaken
as a hostile.>>

TIA

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"Omnia Mutantur Nihil Interit"  -  Sandman 'The Wake'
"Everything Changes, but nothing is truly lost" 

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 01:08:38 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: re: Arghh <snip>

Douglas Berry wrote:

>At 12:16 PM 8/16/97 +0100, Dom wrote:
>
>>I would like to see a product at a similar level of simplicity to High
>>Guard that allows construction from TL9 through TL16, and up to 1 million
>>displacement tonnes. It is what I expected from the SSDS when I happily
>>bought starships.   <Sigh.>
>
>I would hazard a guess that this is the role that QSDS fills..  a simple
>yet fulfiling design sequence for those who don't enjoy number crunching
>with FFS.

Yes - I tried QSDS (inc. 1.5). I do miss the old simple formula based HG
methods... ;-)

>While I have great memories of HG, I strongly prefer the less generic feel
>of the modern design sequences.

Fair point. I like the CT/T4 minimalist descriptions, because combined with
SOpM I can happily handwave most player questions.

>>Whatever goes in T4.1 needs to cover TL9 through TL15, not unlike the old
>>book 2. (I'd prefer a MT type system, but I don't think that will happen...)
>
>I think that the latest revision of QSDS needs to go in, with as many
>packages as possible.  Perhaps some of us gearheads could write up QSDS
>articles for the Journal?

I agree, and if you could put in design tips like those in some of the
TD/MTJ and in Imperiallines 1 it would be very helpful.

>The important thing is that whichever system is used, the end result ship
>stays the same.. No matter how it was designed, the stats all read in the
>standard format.

Yes. This is where T4 is falling down. One way around it would be to kill
Starships off by putting the construction rules in the Naval Architect's
Handbook (Eg tips on deckplans, the design sequence *and* something like
the SOpM in a nice hardback book ;-) not that this will ever happen!)

>>At the moment, although I own starships and VDS and QSDS I still use High
>>Guard and convert with Rob Flammang's excellent system.
>
>Whatever works best for you!

That's the crux I think, as FF&S2 is at a different level to SSDS, QSDS. Me
- - I own FF&S1 and I really liked it as a product, and from the review I
will look at FF&S2 and buy it if it matches the same standard. I use HG as
I know  can build a ship in 30 min and be happy with it, and convert it to
T4. As I'm rerunning CT stuff with a T4/MT/CT hybrid (and, horror of
horrors I allow ships designed under all three...) it fits in just nice.

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"Omnia Mutantur Nihil Interit"  -  Sandman 'The Wake'
"Everything Changes, but nothing is truly lost" 

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 01:09:36 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Query?!

Hmm. Anyone remember what Regina Downport is called? I've read it somewhere...

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"Omnia Mutantur Nihil Interit"  -  Sandman 'The Wake'
"Everything Changes, but nothing is truly lost" 

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 17:51:20 -0700 (PDT)
From: "John R. Snead" <jsnead@netcom.com>
Subject: Likely FF&S2 Error and a Question (Fuel Rates)

I just picked up FF&S2.  It looks good so far, but I do have one question
of some import.  On page 105 the rocket tables seem to be incorrect: 

Table 166 lists liquid fuel rockets as having Fuel Rates of around 1
m^3/hr/kN for normal rockets and around 7 m^3/hr/kN for Liquid Hydrogen
rockets. 

Then in table 167 (Nuclear Rockets) the Fuel Rate for nuclear rockets is
84 m^3/hr/kN for ordinary nuclear rockets around 60 m^3/hr/kN for advanced
nuclear rockets and 1.43 m^3/hr/kN for gas core nuclear rockets

Now, I know for a fact that nuclear rockets, are notably more fuel
efficient than liquid fuel rockets and that gas core nuclear rockets are a
whole hell of a lot more fuel efficient than ordinary liquid fuel rockets. 

Even allowing for the fact that LOX+LH (listed here as HRF) rocket fuel is
4.3 times a dense as pure liquid hydrogen, the discrepancy between Fuel
rates of 84 and 7 seems unlikely. Even if you convert and go purely by
kg/hr/kN solid core nuclear rockets have a fuel rate 2.7 times that of
liquid fuel rocket of the same TL.  This is clearly impossible. 

My guess is that the fuel rates for all the fission rockets are marked up
by a factor of 10, but I have no way of knowing for sure. many of the
folks who worked on this book are on this list.  Could anyone post the
correct figures? 

Many Thanks-


- -John Snead jsnead@netcom.com

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 21:29:55 -0400
From: Daniel Ray Lane <drlane@pinn.net>
Subject: Re: Query?!

SD Mooney wrote:
> 
> Hmm. Anyone remember what Regina Downport is called? I've read it somewhere...
> 
> Dom

Why, I believe its the infamous "Luck Gibson Down." 

- -Dan Lane

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 18:26:51 -0800
From: Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca>
Subject: Re: T41 Skills Draft C Carousing

>	A character with Carousing also understands proper behaviors for moving
>within +/- 2 of the character's Social Standing. For example, Eneri Dinsha
>779789 is comfortable carousing with any characters with Soc between 7 and B.

This is an interesting and useful game mechanic, but I need just a bit more
explanation. Does this mean the character cannot contribute to the task
roll for a character with a Soc outside +/- 2 of his or her own Soc? Does
it mean that the character is personally uncomfortable dealing with someone
outside his or her own Soc? What if someone doesn't have Carousing skill;
are they uncomfortable with anyone not of their own social standing? I'm
not trying to pick nits, I just don't understand this rule as written.

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 14:19:17 -0800
From: Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca>
Subject: Re:T41 Chargen

>I have really enjoyed working on T41 Chargen, and as it nears completion, I
>want to point out the elements that I think are important/fun/interesting.

I would like a definitive answer on whether the chargen rules are designed
to produce 'typical' characters one meets every day or 'heroic' characters
with abilities beyond that of the average person. I can run a campaign
either way, but in either case there should be guidelines for creating the
other type of character. If player characters have only their goals and
personal drive that make them different there should be rules for making a
naturally gifted or powerful character. If the players are supposed to be
the cream of humaniti there should be rules for creating ordinary employees
and opponents.

- --
Richard Hough
rdhough@orca.bc.ca

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 18:28:46 -0800
From: Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca>
Subject: RE:T41 Skills Draft A Armorer

>>    How are you planning to handle the differences in Tech Levels?  TL2-3
>>Armorer is going to know how to craft chain and plate mail from scratch,
>>swords and perhaps up to flintlock firearms.  However I seriously doubt
>he's >going to have a CLUE as to how to handle Battle Dress.  And the
>situation is >reversed, a TL13 Armorer is going to look at a suit of plate
>mail and go >"Huh?!?"
>
>My solution is to have the players put the TL they learned the skill at
>after the skill name  (Armorer(TL3)-4, for example).  That way I can
>penalize players who are using wildly different TL equipment.

I use this idea too, but only in cases where the character has trained in
the skill off their home world. Otherwise, all skills are learned at the
tech level of the character's home world, which is written on the character
sheet.

There should also be rules for using skills at different tech levels than
what one has trained at. I posted my rules for such situations to the TML a
while ago, but in general an armorer would get a -1 DM for each tech level
below his or her training the task is, or an additional task die for each
tech level above his or her training. The complete rules define a "degree
of separation" to determine the actual modifier, but this would be a
typical ruling assuming the character was otherwise familiar with the task
to be done.

- --
Richard Hough
rdhough@orca.bc.ca

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 21:28:36 -0400
From: Daniel Ray Lane <drlane@pinn.net>
Subject: Re: E21 Chronology

Kenji Schwarz wrote:
> 
> Dan Lane wrote:
> 
> >Once real money is on the table, the US
> >can be counted on to ignore anything the US says.
> 
> Pithy insight, worthy of de Tocqueville... hope it wasn't a typo on your
> part. <G>
> 
> Kenji Schwarz
> kenji@accessone.com


It started out as a typo, but I liked it so much I kept it. :)

- -Dan Lane

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 97 00:22:00 GMT 
From: s.johnson107@genie.com
Subject: Re: Asia in Traveller

On Sat, 16 Aug 1997 00:14:27, CardSharks@aol.com Wrote...

>> How about Hiroshi I?
> That's what I love about Traveller. There's always an answer.
    Ah come on Marc, that's weak and you know it!  Traveller is VERY
Eurocentric in terms of cultural bias.  Where are all the Indian colonies?
Given their population pressures you have to KNOW they tried to ship some of
them off to the stars.  And all the ones who went would not have been speaking
the Queen's English!
    What about China?  Indonesia?  Africa?  South America?  Where in Traveller
Canon is the mention of the doubtlessly MASSIVE contribution they made?  I'm
not trying to be PC here but common sense requires they be noticed at least!
Combined they only make 3/4 of the Human population. ;)

Stephen

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 97 00:22:00 GMT 
From: s.johnson107@genie.com
Subject: RE:Genetic Diseases?

On Fri, 15 Aug 1997 08:52:39, dberry@hooked.net Wrote...

> Others have commented on the e.coli situation, so I'll just pose
> a question here.. what about genetic diseases?  My cancer is
> genetic in nature (a result of bad coding for the lymphatic
> system), and I wonder if Yaskodray might have fixed the DNA of
> the moved humans, or if they have the same percentages of events
> like HD, Down's Syndrome, MD and the host of other problems that
> come from bad genetic expression.
    That's an excellent point!  Just from memory I vaguely remember that in the
Darrians book that Darrian women are the object of no little envy because their
genetics don't dictate the subcutanious storage of fat as Solomani genes do!
Also don't discount the survival pressures of those new worlds, Vland was not a
forgiving world to early humans after all and that might have weeded out
whatever bad genetic expressions that did pop up.
    Makes you wonder at the reaction of the Vilani and other humans, used to
fairly homogenious races when they run into the staggering diversity of the
Solomani.  And then they find out about all these weird genetic problems???

Stephen

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 21:05:40 -0500
From: deadeye@ebicom.net
Subject: Re: Query?!

SD Mooney wrote:
> 
> Hmm. Anyone remember what Regina Downport is called? I've read it somewhere...
> 

 Luck Gibson Down?  Or is that Rhylanor?

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 22:41:30 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Question for Marc & a second question

In a message dated 97-08-16 09:28:19 EDT, you write:

<< I think that skills >5 will be rare, >>

By definition in the Education process, Skill 6 is required for the holder to
actually receive a Ph. D in Graduate School. A doctor (medical) is by
definition Edu 9 Medical-6+.

Taking those as extremes, most skills will be lower than that.

Marc

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 22:41:25 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Femicide

In a message dated 97-08-16 10:01:02 EDT, you write:

<<  I.E. if there are fewer women to marry those that are
 there will command higher bride prices, t >>

The problem in India currently being that the price if a bride is negative
(ie, the groom requires a dowry... a refrigerator and a motor cycle for
example). Since that tradition has been going on for centuries, it will be a
while before dowry turns into a bride price.

Marc Miller

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 22:41:30 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: T41 Skills Draft Introduction

In a message dated 97-08-16 09:27:26 EDT, you write:

<< 
 Marc,
 
 Please consider expanding this skill to cover the cargo operations. It
 would be extremely nice to get the Norton 'Cargo Master' type character.
 Looking at a CT type A2 for example, there are three mandatory crew
 (Pilot/Nav, Engineer, and Steward/Medic). It would make sense for the
 steward to be in charge of the cargo ops when pre-flighting the ship (IMO
 of course!)
 
 Dom
  >>

This is an example of why I post to the list... I want this sort of feedback
and input.

Marc

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 00:12:58 -0500 (CDT)
From: Joseph "Chepe" Lockett <jlockett@io.com>
Subject: Re: Bloodwell Incident.

Quoth SD Mooney:
> A question for all you CT crinklies! ;-)
> Was the Bloodwell incident ever written up beyond the quote below?

I believe some of the TAS news from early issues of the Journal had some
more details: check the complete archives on the IG web site.

- ----------------------------*------------------------*------------------------
 Joseph L. "Chepe" Lockett  |"Nullum magnum ingenium | GURPS fan, Amiga user,
http://www.io.com/~jlockett | sine mixtura dementiae | Shakespearean scholar,
  Email: jlockett@io.com    | fuit." -- Seneca       | actor and director.

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 00:19:09 -0500 (CDT)
From: Joseph "Chepe" Lockett <jlockett@io.com>
Subject: Re: M:21C; I-Wars

Quoth Andrew Moffatt-Vallance:
> I've always seen the Terrans in the IW's as being more driven by ethical
> concerns than the Vilani....  <snip>  Anyhow if
> you want just the real estate, biowar is they way to go. That way you also
> get vacant possession :*).

I've always thought the Terrans might have avoided deliberate bio-war for
both military and social reasons.  First off, as soon as they realize the
full extent of the Ziru Sirka ("What do you _mean_, Dingir is just a
provincial capital?!"), the strategists will realize that, to have any
chance of success, they've got to harness the industrial power of captured
Vilani worlds, meaning they need to keep the workers alive.  (S&A implies
they were already vat-cloning as many pre-fab colonies as possible, but
those needed time to develop infrastructure).  Furthermore, the Terrans
have to seem humane and "better" than the Vilani if they're to, first,
hold on to captured Vilani populations and, second, win over other Vilani
subject races.  So bio-war is a big loser on both the military and public-
relations/diplomatic fronts.

- ----------------------------*------------------------*------------------------
 Joseph L. "Chepe" Lockett  |"Nullum magnum ingenium | GURPS fan, Amiga user,
http://www.io.com/~jlockett | sine mixtura dementiae | Shakespearean scholar,
  Email: jlockett@io.com    | fuit." -- Seneca       | actor and director.

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 00:29:33 -0500 (CDT)
From: Joseph "Chepe" Lockett <jlockett@io.com>
Subject: Re: M:E21

Quoth John Watts:
> As for the political structure of Earth, is not possible to see more
> fragmentation of the nation-states we know today.  It would seem to me that
> this is the dominant trend.  I've noticed that most of the suggestions tend
> to be the same nations we know now or the super-states ( such as the EU or
> the Asian sphere ).  

Why can't you have both?  I'd think it quite likely that, as trade and
economic issues start to get handled by multinational alliances (NAFTA,
EU, ASEAN, whatever), many of the existing (economic) reasons for a
nation-state would wither away -- but instead of having a state subverted
to the larger unit, you'd have a profusion of smaller cultural or ethnic
regions.

My own E;21 notes, from when I tinkered with the concept a year or so ago,
have Europe split between the European Union (Eire, Scandinavian nations,
and the German-dominated states of central and Eastern Europe)  and the
Union d'Gibraltar (Spain, Euskardi, Catalunya, Galicia, Portugal, France,
Bretagne, Burgundy, Corse, a few Italian states, Hellas, and a whole mess
of former French African colonies -- oh, and Quebec way across the sea, to
match England, Scotland, and Wales in the Atlantic Free Trade Alliance --
period newspapers describe these as "spies in each camp").

- ----------------------------*------------------------*------------------------
 Joseph L. "Chepe" Lockett  |"Nullum magnum ingenium | GURPS fan, Amiga user,
http://www.io.com/~jlockett | sine mixtura dementiae | Shakespearean scholar,
  Email: jlockett@io.com    | fuit." -- Seneca       | actor and director.

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 06:24:58 +0000 ()
From: kraehe@bakunin.hb.north.de (Michael Koehne)
Subject: Re: E21 Chronology

Moin Harold Hale,

> (we don't even have the partially
> completed space station Clarke mentions started, nor have we established
> a single permanent base from which we can search for monoliths).

	you forgot MIR, ok the last half year was'nt so good, I think
	they'll hang him. Sovjet space technolgie relies on humans
	( they even sometimes dock in a way that they throw a cable
	by hand ) A failed repair, energy and life support loss etc,
	but MIR is still up, they have new people there and thing all
	will be fine again in half a year. I hope ERNO (in bremen
	which is my home town ;-) will sell them a new life support
	system.

> >We could use 3D star maps too. <G>
> 
>    Not in our lifetime.  I don't relish the prospect of having to
> conduct my Traveller scenarios down at the local planetarium.  :-)

	think about having a computer generated map printed for
	any system characters enter before session. 

- -- 
	kraehe@bakunin.north.de		www.is-bremen.de/~kraehe/traveller
		  " ceterum censeo MSDOS esse delendam "

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 07:17:09 +0000 ()
From: kraehe@bakunin.hb.north.de (Michael Koehne)
Subject: Re: Femicide

Moin Peter Newman,

> This problem should resolve itself due to basic economics.  As the
> quantity supplied of an item [brides] is reduced while the demand for
> the product [brides] remains constant the market clearing price for this
> item will rise. I.E. if there are fewer women to marry those that are
> there will command higher bride prices, this will alter the perceived
> value of female children, and the market for female babies will regain
> equilibrium.

	In India you have to give money (quite a lot) to marry a girl.
	India is still using "sudden child dead" as Femicide. 

	Back to Traveller :

	At a given techlevel any population will increase until it
	has reached a limit where agra production can feed people.
	The lower the techlevel the low those people per sqare mile
	limit. Under a certain TL (6-) war is typical kind of population
	control, the lower the tech level the less deadly is the war,
	as its not the intension of war to destroy everything but to
	conquer area. Even in TL1 cultures, where war seldom killed,
	warriors have a high value. Humans still are domesticated
	apes (some say geneered ;-) and males stronger than females
	tend to suppress the later. When the maximum population level
	is reached wars increased, the value of warriors increased,
	so the value of man over women increased - femicide is used
	to have a higher value in the clan ( you can only feed 5
	children, 4 of them should be warriors ) and rape of woman
	from other clans who didnt use femicide one generation ago.
	Lowtech war always mean "murder, conquer, rape" ! Even at
	medium techlevels 6-9 rape is often the follower of murder
	and conquer.  At higher techlevels rape is becoming unusual
	as the goal of war changed to fast destruction of production
	capacities.

	Femicide is common practice on many overpopulated low tech
	planets during the Long Night and the Colapse. I think
	Femicide should be a culture shock for any M0 character
	leaving warm and clean Sylea to explore the wilds.

By Michael
- -- 
	kraehe@bakunin.north.de		www.is-bremen.de/~kraehe/traveller
		  " ceterum censeo MSDOS esse delendam "

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1702
***********************************
Traveller-digest      Sunday, August 17 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1703



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Mileu:E21
Questions on Droyne, Empress Wavefront
Citizens of the Imperium
FF&S2, Table 185 
Re: Spacefaring nations and economics
Re: FF&S2 Review (long)
T41 Skills (Long)
Re: T41 Skills Draft C Carousing
FF&Ss Sensor Volume
Re: ARRRRGGGHHH!!!! (was: FF&S 2 spreadsheets, anyone?)
Re: Questions on Droyne, Empress Wavefront
Idea for Interstellar Wars background
Grandfather's kids and grandkids
Re: Spacefaring nations and economics

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 18:47:09 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Mileu:E21

In mail you write:

>>Physics in it did suck though...
>
>    Well there were some things that could have been explained better,
> but I did note that the fighters and other spacecraft didn't use magic
> plates to make them move through space.

No, they used magic reaction drives that let fighter sized ships launch
from earth and rendevous with a task force at Jupiter without
refueling. And do so in only a few hours (*nobody* can fly a fighter
longer than that, between fatigue and the lack of a bathroom...)

They also had the Trojan asteroids within sight of Jupiter. And aliens
heading for Earth going past the task force at velocities so low that
several minutes of combat at visual ranges were possible...

Sorry, but the science in S:AAB *sucked*.

>    S:AAB had potential, unfortunately it appears that most of it will be
> unrealized.  :-(

The *concept* had potential. The implementation destroyed all hope of
reaching it.

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 02:31:16 -0400 (EDT)
From: SemoFetus@aol.com
Subject: Questions on Droyne, Empress Wavefront

     Hi everybody.  I'm relatively new to Traveller (owned the big Traveller
Book since the early 80s, owned MegaTraveller since it came out.  Never
really did more with either than make characters and use the Technical stuff
in MT to build ships and stuff, eventually got TNE and that's when I started
running a game), and I have a couple of background questions to ask.

     What about the Droyne?  I have alot of information about every other
race, but little more than generic info about the Droyne.  Basically, I only
have the Library Data in the MT set.  I'd like to know a little more about
them, biologically, and would appreciate if anyone could help me out.  I'm
not really looking for references to long out of print books (I'm trying to
get as much old Traveller stuff as possible, but its difficult), just a
little background...

     I also started re-reading the Regency sourcebook (Among other books) to
get a feel for the psychology of the Imperium (especially where crime is
concerned), and I came across the data on Project Longbow and the Empress
Wavefront...  Was this ever resolved anywhere?  If so, what is the Empress
Wavefront and why did it make the Zhodani go whacky?

     Ok, thanks in advance for any help.

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 23:40:33 -0700
From: "Eric Jackson" <Alric@SpryNet.Com>
Subject: Citizens of the Imperium

I've seen the adds for IG's "Citizens of the Imperium". I've also seen that
IG's web site has a place just for Citizen members.

Does anyone know what kind of info is available for members? Is it worth
the $15?

Eric J
Alric@SpryNet.Com
Fuzion Page: http://members.aol.com/rfintnl/

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 00:09:09 -0700 (PDT)
From: "John R. Snead" <jsnead@netcom.com>
Subject: FF&S2, Table 185 

Table 185 is missing from FF&S2, could someone who worked on the book
please post it here. 

Many Thanks-


- -John Snead jsnead@netcom.com

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 09:22:13 +0100
From: Simon Early <sre@taz.compulink.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Spacefaring nations and economics

> There's an interesting White Dwarf scenario called Tower Trouble

Which issue of White Dwarf was this?

Simon

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 09:22:16 +0100
From: Simon Early <sre@taz.compulink.co.uk>
Subject: Re: FF&S2 Review (long)

Thanks for the review of FFS 2 ... I shall go out and buy two copies 
(as I did for FFS 1)!

Simon

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 03:53:02 -0500
From: Alex Ingram <ingram@airmail.net>
Subject: T41 Skills (Long)

I started playing Traveller back in 1977 while stationed with the Army
in Europe. I've been a Traveller fan ever since. I found myself running
a game and unhappy with the skills available, and I hated the JOT. Over
several years I researched how the military broke down military jobs
into tasks and subtasks. I eventually put together my own set of skills
which I use in running games to this day. I offer this list for your
consideration and use knowing some will consider it too much. I have
detailed descriptive text on these skills but including it would make
this e-mail too long. I would be happy to provide it per request.
Questions or comment would be appreciated. 

Alex Ingram
ingram@airmail.com

ADMINISTRATION
	Administration (Bureaucracy)
	Procurement (Scrounging)
	Financial (Stock Brokering)
	Personnel (Recruiting) 
	CargoMaster (ExoFrames)
MERCHANT
	Administration (Bureaucracy)
	FreeTrading (Cargo Appraisal)
	Procurement (Supply/Scrounging)
	Financial (Stock Brokering)
	Commercial (Business) Codes
	CargoMaster (ExoFrames)
	Travel Service (Travel Agent/Tour Guide/
		Cruise Director/Travellier)
	Passenger Service (Steward/Concierge/Purser/Chief Purser)
	Food Service (Cook/Assistant Chef/Chef/Master Chef)
LEGAL
	Imperial (Criminal) Codes
	Civil (Domestic) Codes
	Commercial (Business) Codes
	Space (Admiralty) Codes
	Feudal (Nobility) Codes
	Military (Uniformed) Codes
	Investigation (SkipTracing/Records Searching)
	Interviewing (PsychoProfiling)
PERSONALITY
	Cultural (High Society)*
	Streetwise (Street Society)*
	Interrogation (Intimidation)*
	Persuasion (Salesmanship/Negotiation)*
	Leadership (Command Presence)*
	Protocol (Bribery/Expediter)*
	Instruction (Proctor)
	Seduction (Sexual)*
	Gambling (Card Handling)
	Impersonation (Voice & Acting)*
	* applies only to NPCs
PERFORMANCE
	Dance (Specify Type)
	Voice & Acting (Impersonation)
	Writer/Journalist
	Musician (Specify Instrument)
	Singer (Specify Music Type)
Fashion/Jewelry
	Special Appraisal (Specify)
	Graphic Design
	Architectural
	Literary
	Historical
	Culinary
	Stage Magic (Pick Pocket)
	Craftsman/Artist (Specify Area)
LANGUAGE
	Anglic (Auto SL-5)
	Vilani
	Aslan
	Zhodani
	Vargr
	Darrian
	Others (Specify)
SCIENCE
	Planetology
	Geology
	Biology
	MicroBiology
	Physics
	Astronomy
	Chemistry
	Xenology
	Archaeology
	Paleontology
	Linguistics
	Psychology
MILITARY TACTICS
	Unit Tactics (Company & below)
	Battlefield Tactics (Battalion to Division)
	Military Strategy (Corps & above)
NAVAL TACTICS
	Ship Tactics
	Squadron Tactics (StarFighters)
	Boarding Tactics (Marines)
	Fleet Tactics (Task Force)
	Naval Strategy (Fleet & above)
POLICE TACTICS
	Team (SWAT) Tactics
	Crowd & Riot Tactics
	Search & Rescue Tactics
ASTRONAUTICS (PILOT)
	Ships Boat (Astronautical Craft)
	ShuttleCraft (Astro/Aeronautical Craft)
	StarFighter (Astro/Aeronautical Craft)
	StarShip (Extra/Astro/Aeronautical Vessel)
	Aircraft (Aeronautical Craft)
COMPUTER
	Keyboarding (Speed)
	Programming (Specify Language)
	Networking (Hack/CounterHack)
	Cybernetics (Robotics)
	Cryptography (Codes & Ciphers)
	MicroElectronics (Chip Level)
	MacroElectronics (Module Level)
	Nanotronics
NAVIGATION
	Jump Navigation
	AstroNavigation
	AeroNavigation (Meteorology)
	AstroTelemetry (Spaceborne Sensors)
	AeroTelemetry (Airborne Sensors)
	Strategic Telemetry (Fixed-site Ground-based Sensors)
	Tactical Telemetry (Mobile Sensors)
	Cartography (Surveying & Mapping)
COMMUNICATIONS
	AstroCommunications (Spaceborne)
	AeroCommunications (Airborne)
	Strategic Communications (Fixed-site Ground-based)
	Tactical Communications (Mobile)
	Cryptography (Codes & Ciphers)
	Electronic Warfare (ECM)
	Interstellar (Morse) Code
	MacroElectronics (Module Level)
 
GUNNERY
	Fire Control(Bridge Position)
	Ships Gunnery (Turret Position)
	Ships Defenses (Screens & Shields)(Bridge Position)
	Tactical (Vehicle/Tank) Gunnery
	StarFighter Gunnery
	Electronic Warfare (ECM) (Bridge Position)
	Naval Ordnance
	Special Ordnance (Mass Kill Weapons)
	Forward Observer/Forward Air Controller (FO/FAC)
	Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD/Bomb Squad)
	Damage Control (Fire Fighting, Rescue & Structural Repairs)
	Security/Counter Security T3**
	Boarding Tactics (Marines)
	** denotes Tactics, Technology & Techniques
ELECTRONICS
	MacroElectronics (Module Level)
	MicroElectronics (Chip Level)
	Nanotronics
	Cybernetics (Robotics)
MECHANICS
	Electro-Mechanical
	Automotive Mechanics
	Aviation (Flight) Mechanics
	Marine (Watercraft) Mechanics
	Combat (BattleMech/Tank) Mechanics
	Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD/Bomb Squad)
	Armorer (Gunsmith)
	Machine Shop (Welding/Cutting/Lathing)
	Cybernetics (Robotics)
	Gravitics (Anti-Grav Drives)
	Fabrication Shop (Fabrics/Plastics/Ceramics)
ENGINEERING
	Maneuver Drives
	Jump Drives
	Anti-Grav Drives (Gravitics)
	Power Plants
	Life Support/Environmental
	Electro-Mechanical
	Zero-G Engineering
	Damage Control (Fire Fighting, Rescue & Structural Repairs)
STARFIGHTER
	ShuttleCraft (Astro/Aeronautical Craft)
	StarFighter (Astro/Aeronautical Craft)
	Aircraft (Aeronautical Craft)
	StarFighter Tactics
	StarFighter Gunnery
	AeroNavigation (Meteorology)
	AstroNavigation
	Space Survival (VacSuit/EVA)
	StarFighter Mechanics
	Squadron Tactics (StarFighter)
MEDICAL
	Medical  (First Aid at SL-0)
	Surgical
	Bionics 
	Cryonics
	Special Environments T3
	Diagnostics (Medical Imaging)
	Pathogenics (Medical Laboratory)
	Pharmacy (Drugs & Toxins) 
	Psychometrics (Verification T3)
	Veterinary (Animal Care)
	XenoMedical (Specify Race)
	XenoSurgical (Specify Race)
RECONNAISSANCE
	Pathfinding (Land Navigation)
	Stealth (Stalking/Camouflage)
	Tracks & Traps (Tracking/Booby Traps)
	Surveillance T3
	Locks & Safes (Lockpicking/Safecracking)
SURVIVAL
	Space Survival (VacSuit/EVA)
	Combat Survival (BattleDress)
	Ocean Survival (Swimming)
	Wilderness Survival
	Arctic Survival
	Desert Survival
	Pathfinding (Land Navigation)
	Medical (First Aid at SL-0)
LAW ENFORCEMENT
	Investigation (SkipTracing/Records Searching)
	Interviewing (PsychoProfiling)
	Interrogation (Intimidation)
	Imperial (Criminal) Codes
	Streetwise (Street Society)
	Surveillance T3
	Forensics (Crime Laboratory)
	Security/Counter Security T3
	Special (SWAT) Tactics
	Riot Tactics
	Verification T3 (Psychometrics)
	Search & Rescue Tactics
	Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD/Bomb Squad)
	Security Beast (Specify Animal)
ESPIONAGE
	Forgery (Counterfeiting)
	Streetwise (Street Society)
	Cultural (High Society)
	Pick Pocket (Stage Magic)
	Surveillance T3
	Verification T3 (Psychometrics)
	Interrogation (Intimidation)
	Investigation (SkipTracing/Records Searching)
	Interviewing (PsychoProfiling)
	Impersonation (Voice & Acting)
	Disguise (Makeup & Wardrobe)
	Lip Reading (Sign Language)
	Locks & Safes (Lockpicking/Safecracking)
	Security/Counter Security T3
	Explosive Demolition
	Drugs & Toxins (Pharmacy)
	Cryptography (Codes & Ciphers)
	Holography (Photography/Videography)
	Stealth (Stalking/Camouflage)
COMBAT ENGINEERING
	Construction (Carpentry/Masonry/Plumbing/HVAC)
	Electro-Mechanical
	Machine Shop (Welding/Cutting/Lathing)
	Heavy Equipment (Construction Vehicles)
	Mining/Drilling
	MCM (Mines/CounterMine Warfare)
	Explosive Demolition
	Pathfinding (Land Navigation)
	Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD/Bomb Squad)
BATTLEFIELD
	Leadership (Command Presence)
	BattleDress (Combat Survival)
	Combat Rifle (Bayonet)
	Unit Tactics (Company & below)
	Pathfinding (Land Navigation)
	Tactical Communications
	Wilderness Survival
MILITARY SPORTS
	Martial Arts (Specify Form)
	Sky Diving/HALO (ParaFoil)
	Scuba Diving (Combat Swimming)
	Zero-G Combat T3
	A-Grav Combat T3
	Snow Skiing/Snowmobiles
	Acrobatics (Gymnastics)
	Hang Gliders/UltraLights
	Fencing (Combat Sword) (Specify Type)
	Archery (Combat Bow/Crossbow)
	Mountaineering (Climbing/Rappelling)
	Special Environments T3
GENERAL SPORTS
	Golf
	Polo
	Tennis
	Cycling
	Specify Others
GUN COMBAT
	Combat Pistol (Revolver/AutoPistol)
	Combat Rifle (Bayonet)
	Combat Shotgun (Area Weapons)
	Combat SMG (Automatic Weapons)
BLADE COMBAT
	Combat Sword (Fencing) (Specify Type)
	Combat Knife (Knife Fighting/Throwing)
	Light Saber (TL-16)
HEAVY WEAPONS (Vehicle Mounted or Man Portable)
	Tactical Missiles (SAMs/ATGMs)
	Grenade Launchers
	Machine Guns/Vulcan Cannons
	Mortars
	MCM (Mines/CounterMine Warfare)
	Energy Weapons
	Tactical (Tank) Gunnery
	Tactical Ordnance
	Special Ordnance (Mass Kill Weapons)
	Explosive Demolition
	Forward Observer/Forward Air Controller (FO/FAC)
PERSONAL WEAPONS
	Combat Bow/Crossbow
	Bull Whips
	Blow Guns
	Ancient Firearms
	Spears/Javelins
	Specify Others
AIRCRAFT
	TurboProp Aircraft
	Jet Aircraft
	Helicopters
	AirShips (Lighter-Than-Air-Craft)
	AeroNavigation (Meteorology)
VEHICLES
	Wheeled Vehicles
	Tracked Vehicles
	Grav Vehicles
	Hovercraft (Air-Cushioned Vehicles)
	Heavy Equipment (Construction Vehicles)
	BattleMechs (Armored Walkers)
	Exo-Frames (CargoMaster)
	Automotive Mechanics
	Motorcycles/Gravcycles
	Pathfinding (Land Navigation)
WATERCRAFT
	Hovercraft (Air-Cushioned Vehicles)
	HydroFoils (Ocean Racers)
	Sailcraft
	Submersibles
	AirBoats
	Jet Skis/Watercycles
	Special Boats (Kayaks/Power Surf Boards)
	Ocean Survival (Swimming)
	Seamanship (Ocean Navigation)
ANIMAL HANDLING
	Security Beast (Specify Animal)
	Riding Beast (Equestrian) (Specify Animal)
	Flying Beast (Falconry)(Specify Animal)
	Veterinary (Animal Care)

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 15:46:45 +0100
From: John Wood <John@elvw.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: T41 Skills Draft C Carousing

Marc wrote,
>the chance of an ordinary person having a good time on any given 
>evening is about 17%).

What say we conduct a RL test of this?  Everybody, keep track of how 
much fun you have each evening for the next week - then we can see 
if this works, or if Marc needs to scrap T41 and start over from 
scratch... ;-)
 
John G. Wood  |  john@elvw.demon.co.uk  |  Oxford, United Kingdom

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 03:15:06 -0700 (PDT)
From: "John R. Snead" <jsnead@netcom.com>
Subject: FF&Ss Sensor Volume

I've yet another question about FF&S2.  On page 110, PEMS sensors are 
listed as having a volume equal to the area of the sensor (ie if the 
sensor takes up 10 square meters of hull it takes up 10 cubic meters of 
volume.

For AEMS every square meter of hull area takes up 5 cubic meters of sensor 
volume. 

Both of these figures are much higher than those listed in FF&S1.  Are 
these accurate, or are we missing an order of magnitude or something (I'm 
not saying it's wrong, I'm merely curious).

Many Thanks-


- -John Snead jsnead@netcom.com

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 07:48:17 -0600 (MDT)
From: Merrick Burkhardt <merrick@Rt66.com>
Subject: Re: ARRRRGGGHHH!!!! (was: FF&S 2 spreadsheets, anyone?)

Ahem. Take a breathe. 1-2-3 (this is to _myself_, mind you :-)

FFS2 was stated to be the no-math-barred gearhead design system.  A
developer's tool as it were.  It was never, ever, pitched or talked
about as anything else (here or on the beta list).

> Jesus H. God-dancing CHRIST, Leonard! Did you read ANY of my post? I
> mean really READ it? I can FIGURE OUT what the flying #$%^% a
> light-second is in real life, and so can anybody: BUT HOW THE FLYING
> FRACK DOES THIS IMPACT ON THE GAME SYSTEM???!!!????

I think that you miss the point. Think of a detailed design system
like FFS/FFS2 as a traveller _developer_'s document.  Use software
developement as an analogy.  All of us have played Doom, or
Marathon, or Quake, but only some "gearhead geeks" among us could
(or have) actually made a Doom or Quake out of the ether.

In this analogy FFS2 is a programming language.  QSDS is a "level
editor" to follow the analogy, FFS2 is C++.  The rest of us
users will see final designs.  If you don't want complications, use
SSDS or QSDS.  Somebody with a spreadsheet will knock out extended
hull tables and weapons for ships above 5000 dtons (BTW, there is
already such a hull table for QSDS posted).

> Oh, it will all be made right in the NEXT frigging book, will it? I

SSDS and QSDS were made with FFS (with modifications), period.  It
sounds like if either of these systems had more plug-ins your
complaints wouldn't exist.  Given that a "secret" fixed FFS version
is the basis of the later, easy to use design systems, it makes
sense to print the damn thing so that others with the desire can
make more plug-ins.

> not the gearheads writing and editing the books -- to conform to what
> the GEARHEAD AUTHORS come up with? And mine, as well, to comprehend
> their pages full of incomprehensibel formulae IF I WANT TO DO ANYTHING
> BEYOND PRODUCE A TL12 SHIP AT 5000 TONS MAX?
 
FFS2 was made from the ground up as what it was, the underlying
system for designing stuff.  Real units were used wherever possible
so that regardless of what combat system that gets used, they can
all convert from a set of units that doesn't end up being "hit
points" or some such crap.  There would have been a final stat
within a design sequence had the combat system (*any* combat system)
existed.

> Since what we have is simply recycled TNE -- at the militant insistance
> of the gearheads on this digest, mind you -- and since IG is now going
> to have to resurrect some God-awfully complex space combat system to
> conform to it, and since TNE was stillborn on the market as soon as it

BS.  There is no requirement for a complex combat system at all.
The idea was that the underlying techy rules should be made
available to people that wanted to make plug-ns for the other system
that were consistant.  If you don't want to do the math, wait for
plug-ins---the plug-in developers now have the tools to make them
for you, sheesh.

> 1) Make Wildstar's QSDS the standard ship-building system. Extend it on
> either end tonnage-wise so that you can build anything from grav bikes

It *is* the design system.  All the sub-parts were made with FFS
(you know, that TNE abomination).  By your logic QSDS should be
tossed because it is tainted with math under the surface where you
can't see it. The whole point of something like FFS2 is that if you
make stuff for QSDS it is consistant.

> to dreadnaughts, just as you could in MegaTraveller. Also extend it from
> TL's 9 to 15, so that you can build 90% of the hardware in the Traveller
> universe without being forced into using a hellishly complex design
> system -- that should be OPTIONAL. Right now it is MANDATORY. That is
> RETARDED.

No, it's not mandatory.  USE QSDS.  I notice that in MT you were
stuck using the systems printed, no?  I guess if you found out that
there was a guideline for making up these systems for MT you'd be
pissed that they wrote it down.

The arguement above is like saying that since the Ramayana is
printed in sanscrit, you aren't allowed to read a translation to
english (or hindi for that matter).

> 2) Revamp FF&S 2 so that all the results are presented in QSDS stats
> WITHOUT any lame-assed 'conversions' and use terminology throughout
> which is NOT absent in the other supplements or contradictory to the
> language used in them. (Do you need a professional tech editor with some
> gaming experience? I'M available....)
 
Having a converter to QSDS would've been great at the end of FFS2.
These hated gearheads you talk about did the damn thing with no
chance to really put it together they way they might have liked,
and it would have been _really_ nice if any of us had had the
slightest idea what the combat systems would be like in advance
(note that the T4 combat system was _supposed_ to look like HG, and so
QSDS was designed to produce numbers that would work in this
system---then we get the combat system that isn't in the same
ballpark *sigh*.

> In the event that you can't tell, I've pretty much given up on T4. FF&S
> 2 was to be the magic bullet tht would make everything OK, and I've been
> waiting for it for six months. Now I am being told that not only is it
> filled with high-tech meaningless slang that is inapplicable anywhere
> else within the game system, I am being told it's YOUR fault for not
> explaining this gearhead drivel and MY fault for not learning how to use
> it properly....

Funny that you've been waiting for it for 6 months... so you knew
about it before a few days ago, hmmm.  If you read about it on the
net you shouldn't be surprised.  It's been publicly stated any time
it's come up that it was gonna be at least as complicated as FFS (on
 formula level).  The idea was to reoreder it so it was easier to
use even though it uses formulas instead of plug-in tables.

> I'll get flamed out of the water for daring to air my myriad
> exasperations on this digest, but I literally no longer care..... I did,
> as recently as a few days ago.... You can do what you want and listen to
> who you want. It's your game and your company and your legacy to the
> role-playing community that is going up in a cloud of frustration and
> failure. I quit.

You have been flamed, true.  It is because you chose this product as
the focus of your rant.  It is actually what it claims to be,
with a some errata, but pretty good.  The lack of a combat system to
*use* it with, is a major flaw.  The fact that SSDS and QSDS were
built with FFS, and not FFS2 is another problem.  There (had it been
put in the proper order) you are right to some extent.

It should have been FFS2 (even if unprinted first), then QSDS, along
with a combat system to use it (which should've been in beta when
FFS2 was being worked on).

- -Merrick

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 11:04:50 +0000 ()
From: kraehe@bakunin.hb.north.de (Michael Koehne)
Subject: Re: Questions on Droyne, Empress Wavefront

Moin SemoFetus@aol.com,

>      I also started re-reading the Regency sourcebook (Among other books) to
> get a feel for the psychology of the Imperium (especially where crime is
> concerned), and I came across the data on Project Longbow and the Empress
> Wavefront...  Was this ever resolved anywhere?  If so, what is the Empress
> Wavefront and why did it make the Zhodani go whacky?

	this topic is currently discussed in tne-rces@tower.clark.net.
	of course there is not official answer, as IG is working on M0
	and not TNE. I think you should join up there, and send me the
	the first message-id you received, I can grep the older ones
	for you from my archive.

- -- 
	kraehe@bakunin.north.de		www.is-bremen.de/~kraehe/traveller
		  " ceterum censeo MSDOS esse delendam "

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 16:44:49 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Idea for Interstellar Wars background

Eris Reddoch writes:
>If you want my opinion, it will take the Vilani several generations to
>adapt to the dieases of Terra, and it quote a song from a few years ago,
>"...but there weren't near as many as there were a while ago."

Since someone appears to be working on the background for the Interstellar
Wars I'd like to take the opportunity to suggest an idea that I had some
time ago: That many of the Vilani planets at that time were medium-population 
planets rather than high-pop. Not all of them, of course; Vland itself and
propably many homeworlds of minor races would be high-pop. But most planets
that had been colonized by the careful, methodical Vilani would have a
population in the 10s or at most 100s of millions. This is a big enough
population to run a high-tech society and low enough that ressources are
not strained. Population control would be a matter of course.

As a result, the Vilani Empire, while still vastly larger than the Terran
Confederation, would at least be one or perhaps two orders of magnitude
smaller than one would expect if Year 1100 population figures were used.
 

      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 17:19:32 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Grandfather's kids and grandkids

>Volker A. Greimann writes:
>>Grandfather "designed" his children so that their brains didn't work 
>>in the directions of multiplying, cloning and the like! Their brains 
>>were not capable of thinking in that direction: Thus, none of the 
>>children could clone themselves! (As i remember!)

I believe you misremember. As far as I recall the subject was never mentioned
anywhere. What was mentioned, however, was that Yaskodray had 20 children
(actually, clones, since they were exact duplicates of him) himself and that
each of the kids had "about 20" childern themselves. So the kids, at the
very least, was capable of cloning themselves.

Of course, you can always establish that Grandpop had all his kids and
gramdkids brainwashed into never thinking about reproducing themselves,
but if he did that, why didn't he just introduce a generic "obey me"
order? As I see it neither he, nor any of the children ever considered
the possibility that he and they would one day be at odds. Hence the
2000 year long period of warfare when it finally happened.


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 97 17:00 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: Spacefaring nations and economics

In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.3.95.970813103148.25656C-100000@supreme>

Michael,

> Political groupings: (suggested)

Did we ever get an answer on what AECO (the North African(?) Starport) 
stood for? One of the suggestions was African Economic COmmunity (or 
variations).
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1703
***********************************
Traveller-digest      Sunday, August 17 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1704



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Martial Arts in T4.1?
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1675
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1702
FF&S2 - One more thing that's missing
Re: T41 Skills Draft C Carousing
Re: Femicide
Re: FF&S2 Personal Armor
Re: ARRRRGGGHHH!!!! (was: FF&S 2 spreadsheets, anyone?)
Event Horizon
Re: ARRRRGGGHHH!!!! (was: FF&S 2 spreadsheets, anyone?)
Gridlore Technologies strikes again!
Re: Bloodwell Incident.
Re: T41 Skills Draft Introduction
Re: Asia in Traveller

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 97 17:00 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: Martial Arts in T4.1?

In-Reply-To: <970813160413_1053320169@emout08.mail.aol.com>

> Brawling is one of three members of the Fighting skill cascade (the others
> are Melee and Environmental Combat). Brawling encompasses unarmed,
> unstructured hand-to-hand combat. In contrast, Melee is structured
> hand-to-hand combat (boxing, wrestling, martial arts).

Fine, but change 'melee' to something like 'martial arts' or 'unarmed 
combat'.
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 97 17:00 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1675

In-Reply-To: <33F14088.681E@bellsouth.net>

Paul,

> I think the current explaination < hand waving > for black globes is
> that they are a field of controlled 'free electrons' used to assorb and
> redirect incoming, < or outgoing >, energy to the storage capacitors.
>   We would have to set down how this affects gravitic actions.  
> < Humm...  Can we comunicate thru a black globe by means of a
> gravitic tractor or repulsor using morse code ?? >
>  
> < Another Humm...  Can we manuver a ship with a black globe set
>  at 100 percent, < on full time >,  using thruster plates ?? >

I brought up these points *ages* ago, but never got an answer I liked. 
One way of dealing with it is to say that 'real' gravity passes through 
but 'artificial' gravity doesn't.
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 11:32:01 -0700
From: David Smart <dsmart@flash.net>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1702

Eris Reddoch wrote:
>
> <FNORD> If you want the conspiracy to end all conspiracies, then the
> "aliens from Roswell" were Vilani scouts, and the push to develop missile
> technology during the late 40's and early 50's *was* in response to the
> possible arrival of "their friends" with warships.
<snippage> 
> In the middle 70's a team of deep cover agents (lead by Marc Miiler)
> working in Normal, IL, produced a roleplaying game called Traveller that
> appealed to the brightest and most creative young of the minor race on
> Terra.  It's goal was prepare the next generation of young Terrans for what
> was to come.

I'm ready! I've always wondered what happened to the Mars probe previous
to 
the current lander (as a member of the Planetary Society, my name was
actually on it, dang it!). It get a little too close to the ol' Survey
ship there, Marc? :)

Kinda interesting that one of the early DGP TravDigests had an adventure
centering around a _very_ old holocrystal documenting a scouting mission
to
the world of a minor race. In trying to promote the development of a
world
government, the scouts accidently set off a world war which ended with
the
use of nuclear weapons. Seems the locals didn't having too high an
opinion
of themselves, calling their world "Dirt" or somesuch...look in the
issue
entitled "Vland", I think.

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 16:20:32 GMT
From: jeff.zeitlin@earth.execnet.com (Jeff Zeitlin)
Subject: FF&S2 - One more thing that's missing

I can't say I'm _displeased_ with FF&S2; it does its job, and
does it well.  However, there is one section that was omitted,
and that omission disappoints me.

Alternative technology has always held a sort of fascination for
me - what would it be like if we had _that_ instead of _this_?
What else would I have to change, and how would it be changed?
Could the technologies coexist?  At what cost?  Why would one be
better than the other, or why _wouldn't_ one be better than
another.  FF&S1 didn't explore this deeply enough, but it _did_
at least give jumping-off points.  FF&S2 doesn't.  I want the
supplement.
- --=20
Jeff Zeitlin
jeff.zeitlin@earth.execnet.com

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 09:46:32 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: T41 Skills Draft C Carousing

At 06:26 PM 8/16/97 -0800, you wrote:
>>	A character with Carousing also understands proper behaviors for moving
>>within +/- 2 of the character's Social Standing. For example, Eneri Dinsha
>>779789 is comfortable carousing with any characters with Soc between 7
and B.
>
>This is an interesting and useful game mechanic, but I need just a bit more
>explanation. Does this mean the character cannot contribute to the task
>roll for a character with a Soc outside +/- 2 of his or her own Soc? Does
>it mean that the character is personally uncomfortable dealing with someone
>outside his or her own Soc? What if someone doesn't have Carousing skill;
>are they uncomfortable with anyone not of their own social standing? I'm
>not trying to pick nits, I just don't understand this rule as written.

My take.  Trying to interact with folks from outside your peer group wouild
be more difficult.

I'm a middle class blue collar worker (say about Soc 6); I know how to
interact with my peers in my enviroment, and I'm a fairly fun guy at
parties, so lets say that I have Carousing-1.

If I were to attend a large society function, I'd be lost.  I'd have no
reference point on what was acceptable behavoir.  In a similar vein, if I
were to go to a rave done in the Excelesior district, I'd also have a
difficult time interacting.

For a PC, apply additional difficulty to any Carousing task when the
average SOC of the group is more than +/-2 different from the character's SOC.

Of course, it could be a (humorous) cooperative task, with the one SOC C pc
leading his compatriots through a series of misadventures at the Duke's Ball...
- --
+------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry         dberry@hooked.net   |
| Gearhead & Planetologist, Traveller since 1977 |
|     Inquistor Magnus, Royal Commission for     |
|               Canon Correctness                |
|         http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|************************************************|
| "I believe in my heart that all astromoners    |
|  should be forced to go outside on summer      |
|  nights, just to admire the sky."  -Carl Sagan |
+------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 10:17:11 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: Re: Femicide

On Sat, 16 Aug 1997, Peter Newman wrote:

> Douglas E. Berry wrote
> > My biggest
> > fear is the social disruption as the hordes of men go looking for wives,
> > and the find that they have to fight over them.
> 
> This problem should resolve itself due to basic economics.  As the
> quantity supplied of an item [brides] is reduced while the demand for
> the product [brides] remains constant the market clearing price for this
> item will rise. I.E. if there are fewer women to marry those that are
> there will command higher bride prices, this will alter the perceived
> value of female children, and the market for female babies will regain
> equilibrium.

The problem, is that in the places we're talking about, you still have to
_pay_ the groom to get your daughter married. Women are considered
liabilities from the moment they're born...it will take a LOT of upheaval
before people actually _pay_ the fathers of the bride to get married.

After all, killing your wife because she didn't bring in enough dowry is
still relatively common in rural India. You keep what she brought in, and
_hey_ you're single again! Try again!

Also, this is a deeply engrained human behavior, dowries or their
equivalent, persist in nearly all culture to this day. Why do you think
it's traditional for the _brides_ family to pay for the (often lavish)
wedding?


Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs


> 

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

Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 17:48:35 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: FF&S2 Personal Armor

> >Question for you:  I was hoping to have a section on personal armor.
> >I want to create the CT era armor types in the T4 game system--you
> >know, Combat Armor, Cloth, etc.

> 	Sorry, this isn't in FF&S2.  Hopefully, there will be an FF&S3, 
> or at least a series of JTAS articles, that cover this and other topics 
> like walker suspensions, wet navies, robots, etc.


Damn!  I've been waiting for this to get some different armor types 
into T4.  What the heck am I going to do now?

Kenneth.

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 14:27:18 -0400
From: Bob Sanders <bsanders@amghome.com>
Subject: Re: ARRRRGGGHHH!!!! (was: FF&S 2 spreadsheets, anyone?)

From: JayStr <jaystr@best.com> who wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
Oh, cripes.... give me a break.... like anybody in here has any idea
what all of this bullshittium technology is going to look like

****BIG SNIP****

I'll get flamed out of the water for daring to air my myriad
exasperations on this digest, but I literally no longer care..... I did,
as recently as a few days ago.... You can do what you want and listen to
who you want. It's your game and your company and your legacy to the
role-playing community that is going up in a cloud of frustration and
failure. I quit.

- - -- Jay Stranahan
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

All truth is good, but not all truth is good to say.
- -- Anonymous (African proverb)

Bob Sanders

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

Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 18:19:19 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
Subject: Event Horizon

I saw Event Horizon last Friday.

Talk about Traveller looking!!  This pic looked great, and it had a 
lot of Traveller technology.  It's nice to have a high budget movie 
like this so that I can point to it and say to my players, "this is 
what it normally looks like."

The only real big deviation from Traveller were the Grav-tanks.  
Evidently, the ships in the movie don't have inertial compensators, 
so the crew gets into these water tanks which somehow protects them 
from the 30 Gs put on by their main drive.

The movie's tech was a little low--I'd say about TL10.  They don't 
have (or, actually, just got) FTL drives;  their space suits are 
pretty bulky (I saw a show about the film on cable which said that 
the costumes for the space suits weighed 70 lbs!--which is about the 
same as a Traveller TL9 suit, BTW).

It looks like they've got their M-Drives up to Traveller standard, 
though.  It took some 72 hours for the ship to reach Neptune from 
Earth.

The look of the film is incredible--one of the best sci-fi looking 
movies I've seen in a long time.  It's done in the tradition of 
Alien, Blade Runner, and Outland, so everything looks dirty, 
functional, and real.

There's a scene where a man goes into space without a suit, and I'll 
be derned if they didn't get that right--according to the NASA web 
site info that I read from a source right here on the TML.  It was 
good for my players to see that seen because they all had pictures of 
Outland's head explosions in their minds.

All in all, it is a decent flick.  This movie could have been 
incredible though.  It's got a lot of build up, some very scary 
scenes, and a lot of unanswered questions at the end.

I personnally felt that the ending was too weak for all the suspense 
and build up, but another friend who went with me liked all of the 
unanswered questions because it made him think about it after the 
movie was over.

For those of you who don't know, the plot is this:  seven years ago, 
Earth's first FTL ship was launched, and after it did, it was never 
heard from again.

Until now.

There it is, in a decaying orbit around Neptune.  The scientist who 
designed the ship is dispatched with a rescue crew to see what 
happened.

When they get there, their minds start playing tricks on them.  They 
start seeing physical incarnations of their sins and objects of 
their insecurities (a la Flatliners).  But, it becomes clear real 
fast that the ship didn't just jump to another galaxy--it jumped into 
hell and came back.

This film has a lot of religious overtones.  The look of the film is 
also reminicent of religious structures.  The ship itself is shaped 
like a cross.  I understand the production crew went to several 
famous European churches and scanned in pictures of archways and 
walls into the computer, manipulated them, and used these layouts for 
the sets of the interior of the ship.  You can see large, round 
archways on the ship, but instead of blocks, there are metal plates.

Also the gravity drive, which is supposed to be the core of the FTL 
system, is very ornamented like an old Catholic Church.

All in all, I'd say go see this movie.  There's a lot of scares and 
chills.  It's definitely worth seeing, and I'd describe it as Aliens 
meets Hellraiser meets the Exorcist.

There were several times in the movie that I said, "Oh!!! This is 
getting good!", but it never would pay off.  Like I said, I felt the 
flim is a lot of build up with little climax.

I'd rate it as a fair to good movie, and a 2 or 3 on a scale of 1-5.

Kenneth.

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 11:33:02 PDT
From: "Charles Li" <chaslimd@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: ARRRRGGGHHH!!!! (was: FF&S 2 spreadsheets, anyone?)

>From owner-traveller@phaser.showcase.mpgn.com Fri Aug 15 17:20:54 1997
>Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM 
(8.7.3/8.6.9) with SMTP id SAA27475; Fri, 15 Aug 1997 18:11:06 -0400
>Received: by lists.MPGN.COM (bulk_mailer v1.5); Fri, 15 Aug 1997 
18:11:03 -0400
>Received: (from majordom@localhost) by phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM 
(8.7.3/8.6.9) id RAA26982 for traveller-outgoing; Fri, 15 Aug 1997 
17:54:23 -0400
>Received: from Mithril.MPGN.COM (Mithril.MPGN.COM [206.66.87.8]) by 
phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM (8.7.3/8.6.9) with SMTP id RAA26817 for 
<traveller@Phaser.ShowCase.MPGN.COM>; Fri, 15 Aug 1997 17:46:59 -0400
>Received: from proxy3.ba.best.com (proxy3.ba.best.com [206.184.139.14]) 
by Mithril.MPGN.COM (8.6.9/8.6.9) with ESMTP id RAA07776 for 
<traveller@mpgn.com>; Fri, 15 Aug 1997 17:46:57 -0400
>Received: from jaystr.vip.best.com (jaystr.vip.best.com 
[206.86.71.252]) by proxy3.ba.best.com (8.8.6/8.8.BEST) with SMTP id 
OAA13855 for <traveller@mpgn.com>; Fri, 15 Aug 1997 14:45:09 -0700 (PDT)
>Message-ID: <33F4CA3A.10CD@best.com>
>Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 14:29:30 -0700
>From: JayStr <jaystr@best.com>
>X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I)
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>To: traveller@MPGN.COM
>Subject: Re: ARRRRGGGHHH!!!! (was: FF&S 2 spreadsheets, anyone?)
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>Sender: owner-traveller@lists.MPGN.COM
>Reply-To: traveller@MPGN.COM
>
>>If you want a system that follows reality (which is what the
>>term "hard sf" *means*) then it *has* to be complex, simply because
>>reality is complex.
>
>Oh, cripes.... give me a break.... like anybody in here has any idea
>what all of this bullshittium technology is going to look like
>anyway.... Making it 'complex' in the name of 'reality' is simply
>anal-retentivness for its own sake. Militant attitudes like yours have
>crippled the game system to the point where nobody besides a gearhead
>game-geek loaded down with old TNE supplements can make use of it.
>
>>Don't blame the book for not being what you want whernm what you want
>>isn't what the book is supposed to be. If you want simple, then use
>>SSDS or QSDS. If you want to get "down and dirty" with the 
nitty-gritty
>>details, then you have to be prepared to learn how to use the system.
>
>Jesus H. God-dancing CHRIST, Leonard! Did you read ANY of my post? I
>mean really READ it? I can FIGURE OUT what the flying #$%^% a
>light-second is in real life, and so can anybody: BUT HOW THE FLYING
>FRACK DOES THIS IMPACT ON THE GAME SYSTEM???!!!????
>
>Are you wholly impervious to logic? IG should have done this and IG
>should have explained that and IG should have done some other damned
>thing.... AM I THE ONLY ONE HERE WHO IS INFURIATED AT THE FUNDAMENTAL
>TIME & MONEY-WASTING ABSURDITY OF A GAME SYSTEM THAT HAS BEEN AROUND 
FOR
>BETTER THAN A YEAR AND HAS SPAWNED THREE SHIP DESIGN SYSTEMS TWO OF
>WHICH CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT ARE FOUND NOWHERE ELSE AND IS UTTERLY
>USELESS & NONSENSICAL?
>
>What am I to make of the weapons charts in the back of Starships? What
>are all those light-seconds columns with the little numbers under them?
>Why must I generate a very large number for hull armor or weapons 
damage
>using SSDS and then convert it to a smaller number using a chart in the
>back of the book -- why not simply generate the stats in T4 terminology
>to begin with? 
>
>If a G-hour is what you use to push a missile, how do I measure
>acceleration in a missile using G-hours? That is OK for figuring fuel
>CONSUMPTION, goddammit, but HOW DO I CATCH A SHIP WITH IT?????? That IS
>the idea behind a missile, isn't it? Where oh where in the $100+ worth
>of book that I have do I find out how to do this using G-hours?
>
>Oh, it will all be made right in the NEXT frigging book, will it? I
>should just keep buying their shit and cross my fingers and hope that
>the NEXT book will make it all make sense while the gearheads on the
>digest keep condescendingly telling me that it is IG's responsibility 
- --
>not the gearheads writing and editing the books -- to conform to what
>the GEARHEAD AUTHORS come up with? And mine, as well, to comprehend
>their pages full of incomprehensibel formulae IF I WANT TO DO ANYTHING
>BEYOND PRODUCE A TL12 SHIP AT 5000 TONS MAX?
>
>Since what we have is simply recycled TNE -- at the militant insistance
>of the gearheads on this digest, mind you -- and since IG is now going
>to have to resurrect some God-awfully complex space combat system to
>conform to it, and since TNE was stillborn on the market as soon as it
>came out and doomed the company that produced it to a premature
>bankruptcy, DID IT OCCUR TO YOU THAT THIS MIGHT INFLICT THE SAME FATE 
ON
>IMPERIUM GAMES?
>
>Do you expect anybody to buy a game system that is not only unplayable,
>but gets MORE unplayable with every publication? FUCK technology in the
>real world -- how about a playable GAME SYSTEM???!??
>
>Marc Miller... Jesus Christ, guy... if you are reading this, then you
>have GOT to understand that you have got to quit slavishly adhering to
>what the people on this digest are telling you. They have led you up 
the
>primrose path. T4 is fucked, broken, and incomprehensible to anyone NOT
>on the digest. Under their expert ministrations, you have produced a
>game system which will drive your up-&-coming market of gamers in their
>late teens away in droves. If you want IG to see another Christmas past
>this one, you must do three things and you must do them immediately:
>
>1) Make Wildstar's QSDS the standard ship-building system. Extend it on
>either end tonnage-wise so that you can build anything from grav bikes
>to dreadnaughts, just as you could in MegaTraveller. Also extend it 
from
>TL's 9 to 15, so that you can build 90% of the hardware in the 
Traveller
>universe without being forced into using a hellishly complex design
>system -- that should be OPTIONAL. Right now it is MANDATORY. That is
>RETARDED.
>
>2) Revamp FF&S 2 so that all the results are presented in QSDS stats
>WITHOUT any lame-assed 'conversions' and use terminology throughout
>which is NOT absent in the other supplements or contradictory to the
>language used in them. (Do you need a professional tech editor with 
some
>gaming experience? I'M available....)
>
>3) Offer the techies on this digest a small royalty to produce Excel
>spreadsheets for both PC & Macs so that ordinary folks can design
>individual FF&S 2 components, then plug them into QSDS. Put the
>spreadsheets on a CD-ROM and bundle it with the book. Do not charge 
more
>than $30 for the results. If you have to eat a bit of a loss to do it,
>tough cookies. IG is about where Apple is... the best product around
>mismanaged straight into the ground... and it desperately needs some
>triage.
>
>In the event that you can't tell, I've pretty much given up on T4. FF&S
>2 was to be the magic bullet tht would make everything OK, and I've 
been
>waiting for it for six months. Now I am being told that not only is it
>filled with high-tech meaningless slang that is inapplicable anywhere
>else within the game system, I am being told it's YOUR fault for not
>explaining this gearhead drivel and MY fault for not learning how to 
use
>it properly....
>
>I've got my entire Trav gaming group from high school waiting in the
>wings, waiting to hear when my military-oriented campaign is going to
>start up. I've got to tell them it ain't gonna happen, because I can't
>build anything and don't have an all-inclusive combat system to use it
>even if I did. You haven't lost one customer. You've lost five. Christ
>only knows how many time this scene is being repeated all over the U.S.
>
>The original Traveller came in thin, floppy, user-friendly booklets 
that
>were inexpensive to buy and easy to read for your average-bright teen 
on
>an allowance. It would have been great to go back to that level of
>simplicity, with a more complex design/combat system hovering in the
>background for those who wanted to make use of it. Instead, we've got
>what we have... which is precisely zero. I don't understand how to 
build
>things using either of the custom ship design systems we have and no
>combat system to make use of the data they present. This is assinine 
and
>a blatant waste of time and money.
>
>I'll get flamed out of the water for daring to air my myriad
>exasperations on this digest, but I literally no longer care..... I 
did,
>as recently as a few days ago.... You can do what you want and listen 
to
>who you want. It's your game and your company and your legacy to the
>role-playing community that is going up in a cloud of frustration and
>failure. I quit.
>
>-- Jay Stranahan
>
******** No prior editing done ***********************
God knows I've been a fanatical player of Traveller and a supporter of 
the new system, but responsibility IS required as well as ACTION.

As much as I deplore Jay's colorful language on this list, I can 
understand and in many ways agree with him.  Though I don't regularly 
contribute on the list, I read it daily, often deleting the subjects of 
little or no interest to me or my gaming friends.  As Jay so 
vociferously points out, there is much unnecessary tediousness to the 
systems, especially where Traveller Architecture & Design are concerned.  
Even though we as Traveller players are advocates of real science and 
hard/sci-fi, we are first and foremost PLAYERS!
I think the TML, with its core of dedicated systems specialists, have 
not always kept this in the forefront of their minds.
     In this first year, products have been full of inconsistencies, 
limitations, and errata.  For a system that is supposed to be adaptable 
to all settings, T4 arbitrarily limited the scope of technology and 
design to the M:0 setting.  This not only disappoints those who wish to 
strike it out on their own, a la the spirit of Classic Traveller before 
the reams of background data for the Third Imperium, but it disappoints 
those loyalists like myself who have been signed on since CT, MT, and 
TNE.  Some of us don't want to wait and adventure in the past history of 
the Imperium, at least not if a current history isn't supported.
    I don't know who is responsible for quality control of these 
products.  Though Marc remains the driving force of the system, he may 
be "too familiar" with the system, allowing jargon from Traveller 
incarnations of the past to slip through.  I don't know what the 
solution is, but certainly, it is NOT leaving the quality control and 
thus the future of T4 with members of the TML (for similar reasons).
   Though this may be shocking news to you, I think I can speak for a 
majority of the casual Traveller players and fans (though I am quite 
dedicated), as well as game store managers:

   Traveller, as it stands right now, is gravelly injured.

Get it in your minds, this is the reality out there.  Do you ever wonder 
why CCGs, Star Wars RPG, and GURPS do so well?  Think about it.
Traveller can only bank on its reputation for so long, and with the next 
generation of Sci-Fi RPGs coming soon (Aeon, Babylon 5, Alternity), we 
better repair T4 now or it will never rise again.

Then again, even if T4 went down, I'm sure the list will survive to 
debate some picuyane point til Sol goes nova.

This reincarnation of the rules, T4.1, MUST be done right, just like the 
old GDW standards.  It must be LOGICAL (no 3D max damage rules that will 
end up having so many excpetions to the rule or so many different 
interpetations by referees), CLEAR (like close to errata free, hey if 
T$R could do it...), and well- presented (well-placed charts, no 
omissions, consistent terminology).

This is really your last chance with the non-TML gamers, if it isn't a 
harbinger of a new attitude towards consistent rules/quality product, 
your target audience (new gamers NOT the handful in TML) will go 
away.... and so will T4.

Perhaps we better start thinking about T5?
- -- Charles Li, M.D.

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 12:29:40 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Gridlore Technologies strikes again!

Greetings from Gridlore Technologies!  I=92ve been playing with 3G3 some,=
 and
have come up with couple of chemical cartridge laser for y=92all to use.

The Personal Defense Weapon.

The PDW laser is a weapon for those who travel in areas where the risk of
attack is medium to high, but can=92t be sure of the nature of the threat=
s
they might face.  The weapon is a compact laser, about 35cm long, that us=
es
newly developed chemical cartridge technology to provide excellent
performance without the hassle of lugging heavy batteries along.  Each
cartridge is designed to liberate 1300 Joules of energy into the lazing
mechanism.  This energy can be discharged as a single pulse, or the firer
can select a five or twenty round =93burst=94 at lower power.  This flexi=
bility
allows the PDW to be as useful against determined aggressors as it is
against animal nuisances.

Name      Damage   TL    Range    Shots     Mass   Reloads     Cost
PDW 5mm     4      12    Long      40      2.7kg    .6kg     Cr. 472
5 shots     2
20 shots    1

The L-1501 Laser Rifle.

GT and Polyphorus Optics are proud to debut our contender for the Imperia=
l
Army=92s Phase VI Rifle competition.  The L-1501 is a 2840 Joule weapon
utilizing GT=92s selectable pulse system for maximum battlefield flexibil=
ity.
 Robust enough to defeat most non-powered armor, but can be dialed up to
provide impressive rates of suppressive fire, all from *one* of the 40
cartridges in the magazine.. and at a light 3.3kg, the Imperial soldier o=
f
the future can carry quite an amount of extra shots!

Name       Damage   TL     Range    Shots     Mass    Reloads     Cost
L-1501 5mm   5      12    Medium     40       3.3kg    1.3kg     Cr. 940
5 shots      3
20 shots     2
50 shots     1

As an added preview of what the weapons techs down at GT are up to, we gi=
ve
you the S-232A2 Grenade Launcher.  An add-on weapon, the =91232 is design=
ed
to be mounted on another weapon to provide the field soldier with
additional firepower in the face of today=92s powered battlefield.

Name       Damage   TL     Range    Shots     Mass    Reloads     Cost
S-232A2 Gl   *      12   Very Short   1     +1.1 kg   .27kg      Cr. 79
HEAT       26/10 (explosive)
Frag         2
HE          10
Smoke......4m primary radius

Note that in each case above, the multiple pulses each take only one shot
from the laser itself.  The inspiration for the PDW came from the RC
Equipment guide, and the Laser Rifle was something I'd been noodling arou=
nd
with.

I swear that I=92ll get down to writing my FFS2 review soon.. As you migh=
t
have guessed though, I=92m not overwhelmed by the personal weapons sectio=
n...

- --
+------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry         dberry@hooked.net   |
| Gearhead & Planetologist, Traveller since 1977 |
|     Inquistor Magnus, Royal Commission for     |
|               Canon Correctness                |
|         http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|************************************************|
| "I believe in my heart that all astromoners    |
|  should be forced to go outside on summer      |
|  nights, just to admire the sky."  -Carl Sagan |
+------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 14:52:28 -0700
From: David Smart <dsmart@flash.net>
Subject: Re: Bloodwell Incident.

Joseph "Chepe" Lockett wrote:
> 
> Quoth SD Mooney:
> > A question for all you CT crinklies! ;-)
> > Was the Bloodwell incident ever written up beyond the quote below?
> 
> I believe some of the TAS news from early issues of the Journal had some
> more details: check the complete archives on the IG web site.

F.Y.I.
There was another 1000-ton merchie blown to vapors by the ImpNavy on
022-1098. A Levianthan-class was destroyed off Zaibon in the Lunion
subsector by a Kokirrak-class dreadnought (ouch!) due to a 
"communications failure". Only 15 crew (out of 56, not counting
passengers)
survived.

Just goes to show you, when the Navy knocks, you'd better answer.

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 14:51:03 -0700
From: David Smart <dsmart@flash.net>
Subject: Re: T41 Skills Draft Introduction

CardSharks@aol.com wrote:
> 
> In a message dated 97-08-16 09:27:26 EDT, you write:
> 
> <<
>  Marc,
> 
>  Please consider expanding this skill to cover the cargo operations. It
>  would be extremely nice to get the Norton 'Cargo Master' type character.
>  Looking at a CT type A2 for example, there are three mandatory crew
>  (Pilot/Nav, Engineer, and Steward/Medic). It would make sense for the
>  steward to be in charge of the cargo ops when pre-flighting the ship (IMO
>  of course!)
> 
>  Dom
>   >>
> 
> This is an example of why I post to the list... I want this sort of feedback
> and input.
> 
> Marc

I'd like to see the skill Mountaineering as an addition to the overall
skill
list. This would allow the use of technical climbing equipment and
techniques
(i.e. rappeling, ice climbing, etc.), the ability to select the least
strenuous/dangerous route up a mountain, and the ability to recognize
potential
conditions (avalanche, strong winds).

This skill was first introduced in the Gamelords supplement "The
Mountain
Environment" so I don't know if there would be any copyright issues.

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 14:48:06 -0700
From: David Smart <dsmart@flash.net>
Subject: Re: Asia in Traveller

s.johnson107@genie.com wrote:
> 
> On Sat, 16 Aug 1997 00:14:27, CardSharks@aol.com Wrote...
> 
> >> How about Hiroshi I?
> > That's what I love about Traveller. There's always an answer.
>     Ah come on Marc, that's weak and you know it!  Traveller is VERY
> Eurocentric in terms of cultural bias.  Where are all the Indian colonies?
> Given their population pressures you have to KNOW they tried to ship some of
> them off to the stars.  And all the ones who went would not have been speaking
> the Queen's English!
>     What about China?  Indonesia?  Africa?  South America?  Where in Traveller
> Canon is the mention of the doubtlessly MASSIVE contribution they made?  I'm
> not trying to be PC here but common sense requires they be noticed at least!
> Combined they only make 3/4 of the Human population. ;)

I'd assumed that over the millenia the Solomani race had blended its cultures
into a more homogeneous one, partly due to the development of a world-wide
community and partly due to the breakup/creation effects of the Long Night on
static cultures (effects like language drift, etc.). However, in terms of
ethnic physical appearance, the Vilani are supposed to be dark skinned
(see Cogs and Dogs) as are the Answerin.

Keep in mind that the Vilani don't speak "Eurocentric" english or any other
Solomani language. Indeed, I envision the Regency of the 1200s had already
begun blending cultural aspects of the Vilani, Aslan, Vargr, _and_ Zhodani.

Now if you're talking about an M0 campaign, the same would apply. The Long
Night would have been the beginning of the breakdown of the 
_Solomani-centric_ cultures you've described on any colony worlds with the
word "breakdown" representing movement away from the statistical norm. This
would include both a loss of culture _and_, in some cases, an almost
fanatic adherence to some cultural aspects.

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1704
***********************************
Traveller-digest      Sunday, August 17 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1705



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Mileu:E21
MIR and 3D Star maps (was Re: E21 Chronology)
Flawed accumulator energy densities
Re: ARRRRGGGHHH!!!! (was: FF&S 2 spreadsheets, anyone?)
Re: Event Horizon
Re: T41 Skills Draft C Carousing
RE:T41 Skills Draft B Blade Co
Re:T41 Skills Draft
Re : Grav focussed lasers
Re: T41 Skills Draft A Academic
Re: Asia in Traveller
Re: Question for Marc & a second question
Re: T41 Skills Draft B Bureaucracy
Re: T41 Skills Draft C Carousing
T4+ 
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1703
T4+ (Longish)
re:Questions on Droyne, Empress Wavefront
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1703
Re: 1st IW: The Bio-War

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 19:18:13 -0400
From: Eric Freitas <edf@atlantic.net>
Subject: Re: Mileu:E21

At 06:47 PM 8/16/97 PST, Leonard Erickson wrote:
>In mail you write:

>Sorry, but the science in S:AAB *sucked*.

This is what killed my enthusiasm for this show.
I was completely disgusted after the second episode
and never watched it again.  The wife liked for 
little longer, then she became disgusted for 
different reasons (she isn't a gearhead).

Eric Freitas
edf@atlantic.net

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 15:01:15 -0700
From: David Smart <dsmart@flash.net>
Subject: MIR and 3D Star maps (was Re: E21 Chronology)

Michael Koehne wrote:
> 
> Moin Harold Hale,
> 
> > (we don't even have the partially
> > completed space station Clarke mentions started, nor have we established
> > a single permanent base from which we can search for monoliths).
> 
>         you forgot MIR, ok the last half year was'nt so good, I think
>         they'll hang him. Sovjet space technolgie relies on humans
>         ( they even sometimes dock in a way that they throw a cable
>         by hand ) A failed repair, energy and life support loss etc,
>         but MIR is still up, they have new people there and thing all
>         will be fine again in half a year. I hope ERNO (in bremen
>         which is my home town ;-) will sell them a new life support
>         system.

I'd had heard that the MIR's life cycle was supposed to be 5 years and
it's now been, what, 11 years? If this is true, no wonder it's having
problems.

> > >We could use 3D star maps too. <G>
> >
> >    Not in our lifetime.  I don't relish the prospect of having to
> > conduct my Traveller scenarios down at the local planetarium.  :-)
> 
>         think about having a computer generated map printed for
>         any system characters enter before session.

Great idea but not everyone has access to a computer, let alone one
with a decent printer. Nice to see Pentium 120s with a 1.6 Gig
harddrive, 16x CD, and monitor going for $999 locally, though. Can't
wait for a Pentium 200 laptop to drop to $1200. Then I won't even
have to print it!

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 20:08:28 -0400
From: Eric Freitas <edf@atlantic.net>
Subject: Flawed accumulator energy densities

Someone please check my work, I've been calculating the 
energy density of capacitors that are available now.  By
my calculations, the energy density of these devices are
about par with TL18 Accumulators in FF&S2!  Here's how 
I calculated the energy density:

	capacitor:	100Farads @ 2.5V
	package:	1.5cm diameter * 3.5cm long (cylindrical)

	Energy:
	Ecap = (C * V^2) / 2   
		[University Physics, Sixth Edition, pg.521, eq,27-8]

	Ecap = (100F * 2.5^2) / 2 = 312.5J = .0003125MJ

	Volume:
	Vcap = pi*r^2*d

	Vcap = (3.1415926 * 0.75cm^2 * 3.5cm) = 6.18cm^3 = .00000618m^3

	Now to find the energy density (m^3/MJ):

	Edensity = Vcap / Ecap = .00000618m^3 / .0003125MJ = 0.01979m^3/MJ

A TL18 accumulator has an energy density of .02m^3/MJ, so that's what 
SDI research was for!  Daniel Graham Sr's SDI program has jumped us from
TL8 to TL18 in only 10-15 years!  Gee, let's see, that's (300yrs/TL at 
ten TL's) 3000 years worth of advancement!!

Hmm, this company is also planning on releasing the 5volt version shortly
as well, in the same size package.  That's an energy density of 
0.005m^3/MJ, TL21!  Cool, maybe they weren't just pumping propaganda down
our throats about space technologies benefiting the commercial sector.

Eric Freitas
edf@atlantic.net
	

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 13:46:09 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: ARRRRGGGHHH!!!! (was: FF&S 2 spreadsheets, anyone?)

At 11:33 AM 8/17/97 PDT, Charles Li wrote:

>******** No prior editing done ***********************

Not that a ll little editing can be a good thing, especially if you are
going to respond in general rather than in specific, but that's just me.

>God knows I've been a fanatical player of Traveller and a supporter of 
>the new system, but responsibility IS required as well as ACTION.
>
>As much as I deplore Jay's colorful language on this list, I can 
>understand and in many ways agree with him.  Though I don't regularly 
>contribute on the list, I read it daily, often deleting the subjects of 
>little or no interest to me or my gaming friends.

As do we all.  Most of the E21 thread has no interest to me, so I don't
follow it.  I believe that we all do much the same.

>As Jay so vociferously points out, there is much unnecessary tediousness
to >the systems, especially where Traveller Architecture & Design are
concerned.

Really?  Other than the discussions of the development of T4.1 (which
started when Marc asked us our opinions to avoid a repeat of last year.)
there haven't been overly many gearhead discussions on the TML.  We have
our own two lists (GDW-Beta and ISBA) to really hash things out in detail.
  
>Even though we as Traveller players are advocates of real science and 
>hard/sci-fi, we are first and foremost PLAYERS!

Which I cannot do while I am reading email.  I don't come to the TML for a
Traveller game, I ame originally to contact other Travelelr enthusiasts,
and now for contact with friends and an ever expanding wealth of
information for my campaign.

>I think the TML, with its core of dedicated systems specialists, have 
>not always kept this in the forefront of their minds.

Hmm.. and what should we be discussing?  By your own words, you are not a
reguluar contributor, whereas I am one of the top five.  Tell me what you
would like to see on the TML.  We've had people post campaign logs (not my
cup of tea, most of the time,)  discussions/flames over background
material, notices of net.resources, product reviews, personal
announcements, alternate game mechanics, hard science topics, and a
plethora of other topics.  The only time the gearheads really take center
stage is the THUDDD voting.

This seems to me to be a good balance.

>     In this first year, products have been full of inconsistencies, 
>limitations, and errata.  For a system that is supposed to be adaptable 
>to all settings, T4 arbitrarily limited the scope of technology and 
>design to the M:0 setting.

I'm working on a T4.1 campaign set in the Classic Era.  Milieu:0 was just
the first setting published.  FFS2 works out to TL 21 if you are so
inclined, EA includes TL 16 weapons...  The artificial "M:0 only" view of
T4 is a false one, as any number of people can attest.  I know of one group
that is playing in the first century of the Long Night, trying to keep
their world alive.

>This not only disappoints those who wish to strike it out on their own, a
la >the spirit of Classic Traveller before the reams of background data for
the >Third Imperium, but it disappoints those loyalists like myself who
have been >signed on since CT, MT, and TNE.  Some of us don't want to wait
and >adventure in the past history of the Imperium, at least not if a
current history isn't supported.

So don't.  If you wish to adventure in the classic era, there are enough
resources avalible *right now* to make that possible.  Galactic 2.3 has
reams of data for the Classic/TNE Referee.  Most of the DGP sectors are
avalible.  If you are an old timer, you probably still have a number of the
old products, use them!

Or strike out on your own.  The aforementioned Galactic will design entire
sectors for you in a few minutes, you provide the details.  Make use of the
Jungleblut Subsector from the Sky Raiders Triology, or do something
completely original.

>    I don't know who is responsible for quality control of these 
>products.  Though Marc remains the driving force of the system, he may 
>be "too familiar" with the system, allowing jargon from Traveller 
>incarnations of the past to slip through.  I don't know what the 
>solution is, but certainly, it is NOT leaving the quality control and 
>thus the future of T4 with members of the TML (for similar reasons).

Consider that the best recieved products for T4 thus far have been written
by TMLers (PE, PI, FFS2, M:0) and you might want to reconsider that statement.

The fact is that we know Traveller, play it, love it.  I have found the
chance to contribute to the T4.1 project to be very fulfilling, and having
my adventure published by JTAS one of the better things I've had happen
recently.  The simple truth is that we are the ones who have volunteered to
roll up our sleeves and get dirty.  Dislike the direction Traveller is
taking?  Write something for JTAS or Traveller Chronicle or Freelance
Traveller or any of the other pro- and fanzines out there.

>   Though this may be shocking news to you, I think I can speak for a 
>majority of the casual Traveller players and fans (though I am quite 
>dedicated), as well as game store managers:
>
>   Traveller, as it stands right now, is gravelly injured.
>
>Get it in your minds, this is the reality out there.  Do you ever wonder 
>why CCGs, Star Wars RPG, and GURPS do so well?  Think about it.

For some reason, I always doubt anyone who tells me that he can speak for a
majority of anybody.  Nothing personal, but somehow I doubt it.  Of course,
I don't claim to be able to speak for anybody but myself either.

I'm on very good terms with my local game store folks, and they assure mwe
that Traveller seels well.  Comparing with CCGs, Star Wars and GURPs is
really fair, since they are (in order) a different type of game, one of the
most recognized names on the planet, and a generic system.

Compare Traveller to Star Frontiers, Buck Rodgers XXCv, Space Opera, Fading
Suns, or any other SF-RPG.  That's more of a comparison.

>Traveller can only bank on its reputation for so long, and with the next 
>generation of Sci-Fi RPGs coming soon (Aeon, Babylon 5, Alternity), we 
>better repair T4 now or it will never rise again.

Having seen the B5 RPG, I can safely say that Traveller isn't really
threatened.  Aeon is sinking fast, and Alternity has been panned by the
playtesters I've spoken with.

>Then again, even if T4 went down, I'm sure the list will survive to 
>debate some picuyane point til Sol goes nova.

Sol won't go nova, not enough mass, and.. whoops, sorry, bit of gearheadism.

>This reincarnation of the rules, T4.1, MUST be done right, just like the 
>old GDW standards.  It must be LOGICAL (no 3D max damage rules that will 
>end up having so many excpetions to the rule or so many different 
>interpetations by referees), CLEAR (like close to errata free, hey if 
>T$R could do it...), and well- presented (well-placed charts, no 
>omissions, consistent terminology).

Which is the whole point of the mechanics discussions.  If I may, consider
your computer's OS.  The important thing to you is that it runs smoothly.
to the programmers, that meant endless hashing out the little details of
how to make it work properly.  Welcome to a list full of Traveller
Engineers.  Right now, we are helping Marc do exactly what you ask for by
going over T4.1 piece by piece, and carefully disecting ever move.  It's
helping.  The same thing with all the gearhead/planetology discussions; the
end result is to produce products that are well written and enjoyable.

I will admit to chuckling over the "old GDW standards" comment.  I owned a
copy of the fiirst printing of Mega Errata.

>This is really your last chance with the non-TML gamers, if it isn't a 
>harbinger of a new attitude towards consistent rules/quality product, 
>your target audience (new gamers NOT the handful in TML) will go 
>away.... and so will T4.

If IG rolls out T4.1 with the appropriate amount of fanfare, and gets their
act in gear vis-a-vis letting writers have more than a week to proof their
stuff, T4 will survive nicely.
>
- --
+------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry         dberry@hooked.net   |
| Gearhead & Planetologist, Traveller since 1977 |
|     Inquistor Magnus, Royal Commission for     |
|               Canon Correctness                |
|         http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|************************************************|
| "I believe in my heart that all astromoners    |
|  should be forced to go outside on summer      |
|  nights, just to admire the sky."  -Carl Sagan |
+------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 14:07:41 -0700 (PDT)
From: Rose Ketterling <rezznor@quad.quadrunner.com>
Subject: Re: Event Horizon

On Wed, 13 Aug 1997, Kenneth Bearden wrote:

> I saw Event Horizon last Friday.
> 
><snippage>
> 
> I'd rate it as a fair to good movie, and a 2 or 3 on a scale of 1-5.
> 
> Kenneth.
> 


I just saw it last night. It was ok and I rate it that low for several
reasons:


1) It was supposed to be a horror flick, but other than the abrupt loud
noises, it failed in that regard.

2) As a space type flick it presented great ideas as far as tech went, but
it failed to deliver more than just the "sentient ship" bit and the
gravity drive itself.


I think they could have done way more with the film. I would have rated it
a 2... but that is only my opinion =) 


Rezz-

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 17:32:47 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: T41 Skills Draft C Carousing

In a message dated 97-08-17 12:02:51 EDT, you write:

<< 
 What say we conduct a RL test of this?  Everybody, keep track of how 
 much fun you have each evening for the next week - then we can see 
 if this works, or if Marc needs to scrap T41 and start over from 
 scratch... ;-)
  
  >>
Only "ordinary" people do this test. If you have any Carousing skill, you
will skew the results.

Marc

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 14:51:51 -0400
From: Paul Kestner <paully@bellsouth.net>
Subject: RE:T41 Skills Draft B Blade Co

Subject: RE:T41 Skills Draft B Blade Co

On Thu, 14 Aug 1997 14:51:16, CardSharks@aol.com Wrote...
>       Blade Combat Cascade    Dex, Str, End
>       The Blade Combat skill cascade indicates a familiarity
> with the use of edged weapons:  << snip >>
>
> Stephen Replied:
>  How are you planning to handle the styles of use of these
>various blade weapons? 
>  Not all swords are created equal or used in the same manner
>for the same purposes.
>
>Stephen

   There is a OLD game by GDW called "EnGuard !" that was role-
playing in 14th century france. < Three Musketteers, etc... >
This had a fairly nice dueling format for sword use,  accounting
for different weapon types < two-handed vs. rapier > and
tactics < lunge vs. slash vs. run-away vs. charge >.
   It also has some nifty rules on social standing and social
climbing. < This was the age of 'brown noseing' with an artistic
flair. >  There was a points system for social actions, < like
+4 pts. for conspicious (sp?) spending during a week, >  with
a certian number of points needed during a month to maintain
a given social level.   Some, (most ??), of these actions could
lead to duels.  Also, these actions cost money, which tended to
keep the players always short of cash.
   If something like this was incorperated in to traveller, it
would encourage the 'space monopoly type' to get out there and
mix it up with the locals.

Paul Kestner <paully@bellsouth.net>

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 13:01:42 -0800
From: Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca>
Subject: Re:T41 Skills Draft

>A graduate student in chemistry (Edu-7, Chemistry-2) could probably
>handle this task.

If skill levels are supposed to represent roughly 1 year of experience in a
skill, then I would think a graduate student in chemistry would have
considerably more than a skill of 2. Sure, a grad student who spent time
studying Research, Carousing, or Instruction instead of his or her major
may have low skill levels, but I think a typical grad student would have a
skill level of 4 or 5 in his or her major.

- --
Richard Hough
rdhough@orca.bc.ca

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 12:41:53 -0800
From: Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca>
Subject: Re : Grav focussed lasers

>I would assume that if one can produce both local decreases and
>increases in the gravitational field, it is possible to combine
>devices which do this so as to create highly intense local fields
>which don't obey an inverse square law.

Couldn't grav-plates use gravitic dipoles? IIRC, dipole effects drop off as
an inverse-cube,
so an inertial compensator that uses a gravitic dipole could be strong
enough to hold characters and cargo to the deckplates of a G-maneuvering
ship without affecting the ship superstructure or objects outside the ship
significantly.

- --
Richard Hough
rdhough@orca.bc.ca

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 12:39:24 -0800
From: Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca>
Subject: Re: T41 Skills Draft A Academic

If you're going to have an Instruction skill you should include its effects
on skill increase through experience. The current rules of an automatic
skill gain each year, while simple, conflict with requiring instruction to
learn skills. Either skill gains should be tied to the training or
instruction a character gets, or there should not be a separate
"Instruction" skill.

My suggestion is to require Instruction skill to allow untrained characters
to perform a task with another's skill level (as mentioned in the T4
Instruction skill rules) and to teach characters a skill at level 1. Once a
character has reached level 1, he or she can increase the skill level
through instruction or experience, but a character cannot learn a skill at
level 1 without a teacher using Instruction skill. Alternatively, we may
give books or training materials an Instruction skill level for purposes of
initial skill training. The task roll to learn a skill should be against
the instructor's Instruction skill and the student's controlling
characteristic. Each student rolls separately, and if successful gets level
1 in the taught skill. There should be limitations on the number of
students which can be successfully taught at the same time.

- --
Richard Hough
rdhough@orca.bc.ca

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 17:35:02 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Asia in Traveller

In a message dated 97-08-17 08:20:50 EDT, you write:

<<  Ah come on Marc, that's weak and you know it!   >>

So official texts about Earth through the end of the Terran Confederation
(canon, if you will) amount to maybe 10 pages of text, concentrating
primarily on the broad sweep of history. Written from a Western bias I admit,
as is most of Traveller. But the first emperor is Hiroshi I.

At least it wasn't Miller.

Marc

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 14:32:55 -0800
From: Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca>
Subject: Re: Question for Marc & a second question

>... I think that skills >5
>will be rare, unless you allow players to powergame their generation. Which
>I wouldn't as a GM.

If you don't want your players to powergame, you should encourage them to
get skills >5. Real power gamers will all have skills of 1... and
characteristics of 15. Easy to get, if you let them roll on the physical
and mental development tables whenever they want.

I do not have the T4.1 chargen rules. Do they address this problem?

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 09:30:29 -0800
From: Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca>
Subject: Re: T41 Skills Draft B Bureaucracy

>... When
>serving in a bureaucratic organization, Administration makes the character
>look competent in the eyes of his superiors.

I don't think this is very playable, or even accurate. In my campaign how
competent characters look depends on their role-playing, not on a skill
roll. If I was to use a skill roll for how competent a man looks "in the
eyes of his superiors" I would use Carousing and Social Standing, not
Administration. In my mind, Administration is the skill of actually knowing
rules & regs, and in completing paperwork quickly and correctly. Anyone who
has worked in an office knows this has little to do with how much respect
you get from superiors.

- --
Richard Hough
rdhough@orca.bc.ca

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 17:35:18 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: T41 Skills Draft C Carousing

In a message dated 97-08-17 08:19:55 EDT, you write:

<< This is an interesting and useful game mechanic, but I need just a bit
more
 explanation. Does this mean the character cannot contribute to the task
 roll for a character with a Soc outside +/- 2 of his or her own Soc? Does
 it mean that the character is personally uncomfortable dealing with someone
 outside his or her own Soc? What if someone doesn't have Carousing skill;
 are they uncomfortable with anyone not of their own social standing? I'm
 not trying to pick nits, I just don't understand this rule as written.
  >>

The cohesive group (all with Soc more or less in the same ballpark)
determines how much fun they have. The odd man out (Prince Charles amongst a
group of street people) doesn't commit his Soc to the "Having fun part"
although he could indeed have fun if his roll is successful.

On the other hand, there is no requirement that the largest group dominate.
Maybe Prince Charles is the host, has high Carousing (is the only one
creatting the task), and he determines what the task is.

Marc

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 17:51:59 -0400
From: Daniel Ray Lane <drlane@pinn.net>
Subject: T4+ 

OK.

Here's an honest question.  And it's a hard one.  Aside from a few
admittedly wonderful pictures (the T4 cover, Psionics Institutes,
and maybe Central Supply catalog, along with a few others), who really
thinks Chris Foss' artwork depicts Traveller in ANY ERA?

I'm sorry, because I like some of his artwork, but it doesn't look 
realistic in most cases.  It doesn't look like Trveller.  Traveller 
is a hard SF game and Chris' art really doesn't have that feel for me. 
I noticed that the Lintula Sunrise is a good old "type S" wedge 
configutation vice the fluid blob shown in "Starships."  Now THAT's 
Traveller.

- -Dan Lane

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 18:03:15 -0400 (EDT)
From: GoldRushG@aol.com
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1703

<< And do so in only a few hours (*nobody* can fly a fighter longer than
that, between fatigue and the lack of a bathroom...)>>

  Oh, quite the contrary. Fighter pilots are fitted with, shall we say
"equipment," that eliminates the necessity of a latrine in the plane for long
flights.

  Mark @ GRG

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 18:02:58 -0400
From: Daniel Ray Lane <drlane@pinn.net>
Subject: T4+ (Longish)

(The following is opinion, nothing more.  I don't mind if
anyone takes issue with these proposals, open debate
is useful if is not too exhaustive.)

In part, I think IG needs to commit to good, eye-catching art, 
especially on the covers, to sell the game.  IMO, the game system 
should be definitive and statistically sound.  

It should be a clear task based system that is easy to learn and 
remember.  It should have a character generation system capable of 
generating very detailed characters (as with Mercenary and High Guard)
if you are willing to go to the trouble or adequate characters if 
you aren't so willing.

IMO, It should be firmly based in statistics (but this doesn't 
have to show). You can still keep the trappings of a pseudoHexidecimal 
system, but these should indicate standard deviations from the 
societal norm.

Here's how...

If the average (statistical mean) is 8 then +/-8 give a range of 0 
to G. Thus, by using the standard 2D6 method and adding one, you 
get a range of 3-13 statistically centered on the mean.  How does 
this reflect reality? Well, for example, the highest IQ on 
record, 220 (Guinness book of wolrd records, Marilyn Vos Savant) 
equates to (220-100)/15 = +8 (i.e +8 standard deviations from 
norm = 16 = G!  In other words, this system fits reality but 
the mechanics don't have to be accessible to anyone but the 
designers (i.e. "us").  It also effects minimal change 
on the system, yet allows enormous amounts of measurement of 
abilities.  Suddenly, you can really measure your stats if you 
care to using various physical test batteries lie the AAPHERD 
(it's a physical fitness education skill test battery).  Just 
figure out your SD and you're done.

But all the players would see is "roll 2D6 and add 1" to obtain your 
stat. (i.e. nothing changes but the potential for a detailed detailed 
task resolution system arises).  Then you provide tables that really 
equate to what abilities that stat provides, like in AD&D.  Except 
these tables are REAL.

Deriving simple, FUN, rules from complex gearhead technical backrounds
can make T4+ the DEFINITIVE RPG, the premiere SF game. But we should
consider what makes game mechanics FUN?  Except for gearheads, 
equations do not.  I once read a quote that a single equation in book
will a readership by some enormouys amount (like a factor of TEN). 

So use appendices, use hypetext (in electronic versions).

Well, apparently lots of people like collecting cards.  Some people 
just like collecting "stuff."

In Star Wars and Shadowrun we discover that rolling lots of dice and 
getting sixes is fun.  In AD&D one finds that a "natural 20" is sort 
of like an aphrodesiac.  In Rolemaster its the "open ended" rolls 
that kill dragons.  The extremes are FUN and the source of high 
adventure.  Critical successes and failures make games exciting.  

For me, well, I LOVE detailed character data, career points, 
decorations, commands....  But that's just me.

My brother like the images, the artwork.  He really loves Blair 
Reynolds' stuff.  In fact, he's a DGP fanatic because their stuff
had great ideas and scenes.

But tying Traveller to one background is a mistake.  The rules should 
be generic, generic but exciting and technically accurate, as 
well as capable of providing any level of detail desired.

Those six (eight) little books were magical.  I remember leafing
through Mercenary and High Guard back in the early 80's.  Striker
was the best thing that ever happened to me.  I became a true 
gearhead the day I read it.

I think IG should keep the design system to those who want to use 
it (like some of us). Don't waste resources publishing a work that 
nobody but those on the TML will want.  Provide the detailed tables
and along with accurate and detailed equipment desriptions in the 
generic game.

Then give the players nicely formatted, inclusive, and accurate 
CT/High Guard/MT type tables specific to the Imperium in an 
Imperial sourcebook.  Include easy to find instructions so those 
who desire can download the basic design sequences/spreadsheets 
and transform themselves into gearheads if they so desire.

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 23:39:09 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: re:Questions on Droyne, Empress Wavefront

SemoFetus@aol.com wrote:

>     What about the Droyne?  I have alot of information about every other
>race, but little more than generic info about the Droyne.  Basically, I only
>have the Library Data in the MT set.  I'd like to know a little more about
>them, biologically, and would appreciate if anyone could help me out.  I'm
>not really looking for references to long out of print books (I'm trying to
>get as much old Traveller stuff as possible, but its difficult), just a
>little background...

Beyond  the MT data and the CT Alien module and Twilight's Peak (these two
long out of print) there isn't a lot.. The MT library data is quite
extensive though..

>     I also started re-reading the Regency sourcebook (Among other books) to
>get a feel for the psychology of the Imperium (especially where crime is
>concerned), and I came across the data on Project Longbow and the Empress
>Wavefront...  Was this ever resolved anywhere?  If so, what is the Empress
>Wavefront and why did it make the Zhodani go whacky?

<snide humour>
Both Leroy and Harold are probably going to tell you that they know what
the plans for the plotline indicated, but they can't tell you... probably
to avoid the Templars killing them;-)
</snide humour>

NB If you do find out, let me know... <g>

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"Omnia Mutantur Nihil Interit"  -  Sandman 'The Wake'
"Everything Changes, but nothing is truly lost" 

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 19:41:40 -0400
From: Daniel Ray Lane <drlane@pinn.net>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1703

>   Oh, quite the contrary. Fighter pilots are fitted with, shall we say
> "equipment," that eliminates the necessity of a latrine in the plane for long
> flights.
> 
>   Mark @ GRG

Navy folks call it a "head." :)

(Elaborate explanation will not follow unless asked.)

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 23:49:06 +0000
From: Garry Ward <Garry.E.Ward@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: 1st IW: The Bio-War

At 01:20 AM 8/16/97 +0000, Eris wrote:
>On 08/15/97 at 10:17 PM,  Garry Ward <Garry.E.Ward@worldnet.att.net> said:
>
>>Sounds much like Texas in the early 1800s. Already settled, though sparsely,
>>by the Spanish for nearly 200 years, government invites the new kids on the
>>block (the Americans) to settle where there is room; then when the cultural
>>differences between the Old World Spanish (now Mexican) goverment style and
>>the American perception of government begins to create problems, the
>>settlers reject government authority (an American Tradition), the Mexican
>>government sends in the troops to restore order and we have the Alamo. The
>>rest is canon,er,history.
>
>I *did* rather have that in mind. ;->
>
>>Now, would the 1st Interstellar War have an Alamo? Where would it be?
>
>Remember the <pick a good system>! ;->
>
>Eris
>-- 
>-----------------------------------------------------------
>eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)    using MR/2 ICE #245
>-----------------------------------------------------------
>
>

I'm not sure, but perhaps one of us should be worried that we seem to think
alike.

Garry

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1705
***********************************
Traveller-digest      Sunday, August 17 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1706



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Anagathics (long)
Re: E21 Chronology
ARRRRGGGHH!!! Mk. II
Re: M:E21
Re: Stutterwarp & Heisenberg
Re: S:AAB (was: Re: Mileu:E21)
Re: Event Horizon
Re: 21st c. Terran technology, Vilani psychology, ...
Alcubierre Drive
Re: Questions on Droyne, Empress Wavefront
Re: Martial Arts in T4.1?
Re: Re : Grav focussed lasers
Re: T41 Skills Draft A Armorer

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 01:45:34 +0000 ()
From: kraehe@bakunin.hb.north.de (Michael Koehne)
Subject: Anagathics (long)

Hy folks,

	sorry Marc, if this dosnt match T4.1 revision scedule, tell
	me if you like it, or why you dislike it.

	Request for Comment : Anagathics
	--------------------------------

	Anagathics are medical and genetical methods to increase lifespan.

	Status of this Memo : Experimental
	----------------------------------

	No proposed solutions of this document are intended as
	canon for the Traveller Comunity.  Rather, it is hoped that a
	general consensus will emerge as to the appropriate solution
	to such problems, leading eventually to the adoption of
	canon.

	Distribution of this memo is unlimited.

	Introduction :
	--------------

	I know that this is a broad mixture of diffent kind of canon.

	Adapting it to T4 (perhaps aging checks should be better made
	once per term and not any five years) destroys T4 space opera
	fealing of anagathics makes rich Vilani people live forever
	(T4/Vol1/PP70&78). IMHO anagathics should have side effects,
	or everybody would use them.


	While TNE anagathics were TL15+ and difficult to find even
	in the Regency. I asume that MT anagathics where of the same
	type (even if the rules are quite differnt). But T4/M0 also
	have anagathics for the same difficulty to find (12+) and with
	much higher results, even if produced backwater TL11. Normaly
	there should be no anagathics available in Sylea so I started
	a bit hand waving for fixing this situation as a player ask last
	session. They always deal anagathics, as it is the best
	freight for a yacht. Now as I've read the T4 rules a
	second time, T4 anagathics seam to be broken as people
	using anagathic simply never age nor die. Here is my fix:

	Aging (T4 - private fix)
	------------------------

	  age 35, save one of str,dex,end with 3+ on 2d6
	      40, save two of str,dex,end with 4+ on 2d6
	      45, [ ... ]
	      50, save 3 of str,dex,end with 5+ on 2d6
	      55, [ ... ]
	      60, save 3 of str,dex,end with 6+ on 2d6
	          save int&edu with 3+ on 2d6
	      65, [ ... ]
	      70, save 3 of str,dex,end with 7+ on 2d6
	          save int&edu with 4+ on 2d6
	  and so on 

	  when character has SOC 9+:
	   	DM+1 if TL11-, DM+2 if Tl12+, DM+3 if TL15+
	  when character has SOC 8-:
	     	DM+1 if TL12+, DM+2 if Tl15+

	Different types of Anagathics :
	------------------------------

	- A11V Anagathics Vilani
	  The character automaticaly succeeds one aging roll.
	  Anagathic side effects start at 75 but rolls of 11-
	  are ignored, there is also a chance of sudden death
	  when entering jump space of (real age/100), and any
	  time in jumpspace roll on anagathic side effects
	  ignoring rolls of 11-.
	  First therapy at 40, medical check is once per term.
	- A12S Anagathics Solomani also know as "Anagin Forte"
	- A12S Anagathics Sylean also know as "Viratuk Injection"
	  The character automaticaly succeeds one aging roll.
	  Anagathic side effects are starting at age of 60.
	  First therapy at 40, medical check is once per year.
	- A13B Anagathics Beta also known as "Ghul's vampiric friend"
	  The character automaticaly succeeds two aging rolls.
	  Anagathic side effects start at 80 but rolls of 11-
	  are ignored, there is also a chance of sudden death
	  when entering jump space of (years of using anagathics/100),
	  and any time in jumpspace roll on anagathic side
	  effects and ignore rolls of 11-.
	  First therapy with 33, medical check is not necessary.
	- A14H Anagathics Herzenlust
	  no automaticaly succeed, no side effects before 85.
	  First therapy at 35. Medical check once per term. Only
	  a fumble can cause genetic or psychologic side effects.
	- A15I Imperial Anagathics
	  The character automaticaly succeeds two aging rolls.
	  Anagathic side effects are starting at age of 60.
	  First therapy with 40, Medical check is once per term.
	- A17MT Anagathics Metagenetic Therapy
	  The character automaticaly succeeds three aging rolls.
	  Anagathic side effects start at 80 but rolls of 11-
	  are ignored. Impossible medical test for appling A17MT.
	  Skin will change to cameleon blue colors when the therapy
	  is successfull, otherwise a side effect take place imideate,
	  together with 1d6 aging rolls! Therapy will last half a year.
	  Further medical checks are not necessary, nor any subsequent
	  therapy or injection. TL17MAT is not a drug, but a genetic
	  therapy.

	Usage of Anagathics :
	--------------------

	On a roll 12+ on 2d6 (using standart modifiers) a doctor able of
	handling anagathics (or a pusher for A13B), is available. When
	first adapting anagathics roll on the side effects table, a
	formidable medical check is posible to avoid side effects. Any
	furher time a medical check is necessary, roll an difficult
	test, to avoid side effects. Once the official side effects
	starts, medical help can only lessen, or repair by surgery
	afterwards those side effects, but never avoid. Whenever a
	fumble rolled by the medical roll 1d6 times on side effects
	table.

	When using Anagathics a character dos not increase visual
	age, nor dos he step further in the aging table. But the
	clock is still ticking. And he has still to make savings
	throws any 5 years to prevent aging based on their visual age.
	At 60 to 85 any kind of anagathics stoped working probately,
	as the live will decreased together with inteligence.
	Side effects normaly occuring by a medical failures become
	more likely so its wise not to abuse anagathics, but to stop.

	When a character stops using anagathics, a formidable medical
	check is necessary or aging must be rolled twice next time.

	Genetic and Psycholoical side effects caused by anagathic abuse
	---------------------------------------------------------------

	roll 2d6+TermsOfAnagathicsUse+LastTimeMod-MedicalSkillLevel :

	4-	no effect
	5-6	minor growths
	7	minor growths 			+1 for next check
	8-9	major growths 			+2 for next check
	10	major disconfiguration 		+3 for next check
	11	major disconfiguration 		+3 for next check
	12	minor psychological effects 	+6 for next check
	13	moderate psychological effects 	+8 for next check
	14	major psychological effects 	+10 for next check
	15+	psychopatic behavior 		+12 for next check

	History of Anagathics ( totaly uncanon ! ;-)
	---------------------

	Perhaps one of the main drawbacks the Vilani had was that while
	anagathics were strictly forbidden they were sectetly at common
	use by Vilani nobles. A lot of them feared jump space so much
	that they prefered to wait for the Solomanis to arive, instead
	of obeing their fleet commands orders to group in bigger fleets.

	Like a lot of other technics the solomani improved anagathics
	(using their +2 bonus for medical/genetics) after the first war,
	but deceidet to make anagathics classified and restricted for
	special operation like Jan de Lubbe, C-Jammer, and others, as
	terra had a population code of B, during 1th to 3rd war.
	Later in the RoM the Vilani expirience and known side effects
	prevented that Anagin Forte sold well.

	In the Long Night Vilani nobles returned in abusing A11V
	anagathics, so staying on their backwater planets and waiting
	for the Sylean Confederation. Getting A12S was a bit
	to easy in the early 3I. Be unemployed, cought by the ESA,
	and decide to become a member of a medical field test.
	Some yeas later as A12S realy worked, prices where high
	and the need for steady medical help still prevented the
	use of A12S as a common drug for export.

	A13B-SuSAG was at widly use in the antebellum (3I : 200-600),
	but later forbidden as A13B had the same jump intolerance
	like A11V, and as A15I was available, consumers had to switch
	to the new drug by an Imperial decrete, and production had to
	become upgraded or closed.

	During the consolidation wars a new type of Anagathics
	showed up. Anagin-Herzenslust a island solomani improvement
	of standart Anagin, showing nearly no side effects when
	used with medical help. The drug was cheap and available
	during consolidation and firth frontier war, as the different
	island fractions financed their military budget with smugling
	A14H to Deneb and Gushemege. While it was not as potent
	as A15I it was medical low tech, so it became even
	comon practice for the middle class.

	Production of A14H stoped when the Regency declared the
	Islands as amber zones, and restricted high tech trade,
	as the production relied on imported technolgies.
	
	Beta showed up second time. Produced by the Gushemege Vampire
	for controling local TEDs. It found its way through the
	Anagathics Island highway to the Regency, forming the
	class of Anagathic Ghuls - former Imperial nobles, now
	Regency citicens without any future.

	As the Regency realised this mistake it was to late. Old
	production facilities were beyond repair, so the smuggle
	of Anagathics continued. In 1202 Herzenslust and Nebelwelt
	restarted A14H production. RQS is forcing quantaine as last
	inspection showed that the automatated fabrication facilities
	are definitivly not from the Regency. As the controls proved
	free from any known virus form, the risk of a war was to high
	for a crew of the RQS-DPC-23DF0020.

By Michael
- -- 
	kraehe@bakunin.north.de		human.is-bremen.de/~kraehe/traveller
		  " ceterum censeo MSDOS esse delendam "

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 00:39:11 +0000
From: Garry Ward <Garry.E.Ward@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: E21 Chronology

At 04:12 AM 8/16/97 +0000, Harold wrote:
><snip>
>   Anyone who thinks that there will be a level of international
>cooperation enough within the next 12 years to establish UNSCA isn't
>living on the same Earth I am.  Same for the establishment of Archimedes
>settlement (from a writeup that is 13 years old).  Far too optimistic
>given the current status of Earth's various space programs.
>
>   Assuming that everyone can get serious about Mars and not just talk
>about it, getting there by 2014 will take international cooperation.  I
>see *that* cooperation eventually leading to the establishment of UNSCA.
>
><snip>
>
>Regards,
>
>Harold
>

Without some as yet unidentified event prompting such action. 

Suggestion:

With all the recent hoopla about asteriod collisions with Earth, how about
postulating one occurs or very very nearly occurs, such as a skip thru the
upper atmosphere within the next 12 years. No one in 1930 would ever have
suspected that the United States and Communist Russia would be military
allies 12 years later, in 1942. The out of left field event of Nazi Germany
changed the rules within a few years. 

Garry

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 17:28:16 -0700
From: JayStr <jaystr@best.com>
Subject: ARRRRGGGHH!!! Mk. II

>FFS2 was stated to be the no-math-barred gearhead design system.  A
>developer's tool as it were.  It was never, ever, pitched or talked
>about as anything else (here or on the beta list).

A high-complexity developer's tool without a system to use it. This is
so manifestly pointless as to be frightening.

>SSDS and QSDS were made with FFS (with modifications), period.  It
>sounds like if either of these systems had more plug-ins your
>complaints wouldn't exist.  Given that a "secret" fixed FFS version
>is the basis of the later, easy to use design systems, it makes
>sense to print the damn thing so that others with the desire can
>make more plug-ins.

God damn it, you seem to think that I'm just whining about the
complexity level -- as though I had a nice safe user-friendly
alternative. The FACT is that if I want to design a fighter craft
(nothing esoteric, like battle armor or blimps or even combat choppers),
or a dreadnaught, or anything over 5000 tons and not of TL10-12 that I
am pretty much WITHOUT options. 

Look... for all my Irish temperament, I'm actually a pretty easy guy to
satisfy. Just please in the name of God tell me how to build a cute
widdle space fighter for T4 without a scientific calculator... then a
20,000 ton carrier to wrap around several squadrons of them... nothing
esoteric, like hot-air balloons or Bussard ramjets....

>FFS2 was made from the ground up as what it was, the underlying
>system for designing stuff.  Real units were used wherever possible
>so that regardless of what combat system that gets used, they can
>all convert from a set of units that doesn't end up being "hit
>points" or some such crap.  There would have been a final stat
>within a design sequence had the combat system (*any* combat system)
>existed.

Oh. Ah. I see. It's all IG's fault for not keeping up with the authors,
who continue to charge innovatively ahead and design ever-more complex,
evermore incompatible design systems for a game that cannot make use of
what they generate.

>> Since what we have is simply recycled TNE -- at the militant insistance
>> of the gearheads on this digest, mind you -- and since IG is now going
>> to have to resurrect some God-awfully complex space combat system to
>> conform to it, and since TNE was stillborn on the market as soon as it

>BS.  There is no requirement for a complex combat system at all.
>The idea was that the underlying techy rules should be made
>available to people that wanted to make plug-ns for the other system
>that were consistant.  If you don't want to do the math, wait for
>plug-ins---the plug-in developers now have the tools to make them
>for you, sheesh.

Oh, okay. I should just shut up and quit bitching and crawl back under
my rock and design pieces of hardware that I can only create with
somebody else's custom-written spreadsheets downloaded off the Internet
that generate statistics like G-hours and microseconds that I have no
way of converting to QSDS stats, unless by the grace of God the guy that
wrote the spreadsheet includes a little column at the bottom that does
it for me. And toss my $100 worth of books, which I might not even have
bothered buying, seeing that not one of them agrees with the other. 

In brief, I should simply have taken up checkers for a year and a half,
waited for FF&S2 to come out, then bum a spreadsheet for it off
somebody. Groovy. NOW you tell me.

>These hated gearheads you talk about did the damn thing with no
>chance to really put it together they way they might have liked,
>and it would have been _really_ nice if any of us had had the
>slightest idea what the combat systems would be like in advance
>(note that the T4 combat system was _supposed_ to look like HG, and so
>QSDS was designed to produce numbers that would work in this
>system---then we get the combat system that isn't in the same
>ballpark *sigh*.

Understatement of the year.... but it still doesn't explain the
incompatible-with-anything VDS. Nor the different language, stats, etc.
between SSDS and QSDS. Nor a new FF&S that is slightly off-kilter with
the old, which means that even if somebody had the out-of-print book to
make their own plugins that they will now have to revamp EVERY FRIGGING
THING THEY'VE BUILT to conform to the new standard.

>You have been flamed, true.  It is because you chose this product as
>the focus of your rant.  It is actually what it claims to be,
>with a some errata, but pretty good.  The lack of a combat system to
>*use* it with, is a major flaw.  

ANY BOOK FOR DESIGNING HARDWARE THAT HAS NO SYSTEM FOR USING IT IS A
WASTE OF TIME AND MONEY, and only a techno-game-geek locked into their
own private litle introverted universe could possibly fail to understand
(and hence be offended by) this. Nevermind the complexity level -- let's
just set the whole issue of real-world complexity for real-world users
off on the side for a minute. As is, FF&S2 is a $25 paperweight, because
YOU CANNOT F*CKING USE WHAT YOU F*CKING BUILD. Why is that hard for
people to grasp?

It would be -- not OK, but more palatable -- if there were alternatives.
What is common fare in any SF game? Space fighters? Space fighters are
cool. Robots? Hovertanks? Dreadnaughts? Powered battle armor? Okay;
let's keep it simple; let's stop right there.We can't let everybody have
everything they want. Let's confine ourselves to the basics.

Where are my stock dreadnaughts and space fighters and robots and
things? Can I, after 1 year and $120, even HAVE these staples in my
campaign unless I buy FF&S2 and whip them up myself out of whole cloth?
No. Do I have a rules set that tells me what happens when all the
warbots and hovertanks and star cruisers all start shooting at each
other? No. Can I design stuff using FF&S2 that will be compatible with
the (old-FF&S-based) QSDS and SSDS-constructed ships (assuming I've
found and downloaded the un-broken version of QSDS off the Net), as well
as (virtually non-existant) stock ship & vehicle designs? No.

Perhaps it makes you happy to have your complex little design system
with which you can fine-tune ships and vehicles and ordnance that sit
there and look pretty and do nothing, but not me -- oh! I forgot! You've
GOT the old TNE books! More importantly, you can UNDERSTAND them! You
can USE what you build! What about the rest of the planet? What about
people who haven't been playing Traveller since 1979? What about
somebody who's just getting into the game for the first time who is
getting good and mad because they have been given three design systems,
the first of which is erroneous and the latter two of which contain gobs
of material and statistics and whatnot that have no way of being used in
the game?

>The fact that SSDS and QSDS were
>built with FFS, and not FFS2 is another problem. 

Oh, REALLY? So we are going to have to revamp all our existing designs
YET AGAIN to conform with YET ANOTHER rules set, even if we were
faithful to the original FF&S? Of course, that actually shouldn't be too
much trouble for IG, since most if not all of the stock designs in
Starships were made up out of thin air anyway.... but what about all
those ships built using QSDS and SSDS in the intervening time (they are
mutually incompatible, remember -- not in theory, but in fact.) I guess
now we need QSDS 2 and SSDS 2, to conform to FF&S2!!!

Why would any normal person pay good money for this sort of whiplash
every few months?

>It should have been FFS2 (even if unprinted first), then QSDS, along
>with a combat system to use it (which should've been in beta when
>FFS2 was being worked on).

Holy shit and tomato juice. You are seriously telling me that you come
out with the high-complexity design system FIRST, then the SIMPLE
version for all the kiddies, THEN the combat system to make use of what
you build and all the stock designs that should have been included in
the original release? (What good is an SF game without spaceships? or a
rules set so they can shoot at each other)?

It is this sort of raging obliviousness to the real world that the $120
I've spent on T4 supplements is hostage to. It is also an excellent
example of how badly IG screwed up when they placed the writing and
editing of the game system in the hands of a select few gearheads on
this digest.... each of whom enforces their own biases in every book
they write.... farming game design and writing out to the fan-gurus must
have looked like such a shrewd and cost-saving measure two years ago;
kind of like putting the Mormons and the Ba'hai and the Messianic Jews
together and telling them to write the definitive treatise on
monotheism. By commitee. For free. Like the outcome isn't as predictable
as a Klan rally in East L.A.

Even if the math were correct, which it isn't in the only published
version, QSDS doesn't agree with SSDS on a whole host of matters (how
are docking rings and external grapples different? why figure mass for
SSDS and not QSDS? do sandcasters need to be put in batteries or not?
with MFD's or not? what are microseconds? how do you control 5 missiles
with an MFD that only controls 3? and what dumb shit would design a
warship that couldn't control its own weapons anyway?). And we have an
alleged 'Vehicle Design System' that is compatible with none of the
above, even using either of the two available flavors of FF&S; and that
even WHEN some magical, all-unifying combat system comes out, will be
incompatible with that, too. Apparently in T4 ground-based vehicles and
starships will not be allowed to shoot at each other. (Ever seen a 1,000
ton destroyer escort converted to gunship duty with a dozen railguns
linked directly to the main power plant? Ever seen a Mobile Orbital
Defense Platform consisting basically of a starship laser turret with a
hover-drive and a crew pod? Doubles as a great tank destroyer.)

Between stock starship designs that are simply made up and cannot be
built with anything, and the above design issues, and the fact that the
NEW master design system is apparently a little-bit incompatible with
the old out-of-print semi-comprehensible one... I don't know whether to
laugh or cry. I simply cannot believe that people are happily defending
this. I feel like I'm trying to describe color to a blind man. The more
I point out that things are non-functional, the more people insist that
it is (1) actually okay and will all be resolved in the next book, or
(2) IG's fault. 

Oh well. Maybe somebody will take pity on this poor sinner and design an
Excel spreadsheet to design capital fire-&-forget missiles, along with
stats for the launcher and a column for conversion to QSDS stats... a
VLS that shoots Sidewinders the size of a telephone pole.... and then a
nice 20-ton fighter that can carry a pair on external racks...

Until then, I STILL quit. This broken, self-contradicting, Swiss-cheese
excuse for an overpriced puke-ola game system will claim not one jot
more of my time or money. This whole f*ckaround has reached such heights
of baroque unreality that it defies description. Not only is the Emperor
naked, but he's dead -- and instead of trying to revive the sonofabitch,
or anoint a worthy successor (T5?), the game-nerds are dutifully
genuflecting to the decomposing corpse.

- -- Jay Stranahan

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 01:05:46 +0000
From: Garry Ward <Garry.E.Ward@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: M:E21

At 07:05 AM 8/16/97 +0000, Harold wrote:
><snip>
>
>   Problem: if the "aliens from Roswell" are Vilani scouts, then why
>haven't we been frantically trying to develop space technology so that
>we can meet and stop their friends before they get to Earth with
>warships?
>
>   I object to first contact in the late 40s not because it isn't
>interesting, just kinda hard justify that's all.
>
>Regards,
>
>Harold
>

Who says we haven't been? Perhaps as fast as we have been able to figure it
out, we have been applying the technology. 30+ years to get from Goddard's
unmanned, barely guided bottle rockets to the V2; 10 years from v2 to shinny
metal ball whipping about the earth (sputnik), and then 10 years later,
multiple manned trips approximately a quarter million miles each way.  

When Roswell occured, 'computers' were differential gears, with a few in the
vaccum tube stage, and lots of commerical stuff of hardwired peg boards. 50
years later, nearly every toaster as the computational power of most 140s
computers.

The Cold War mentality did not vanish with the Berlin Wall; we just have a
larger opponent that the USSR.

Garry

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 00:53:24 +0000
From: Garry Ward <Garry.E.Ward@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Stutterwarp & Heisenberg

At 05:03 AM 8/16/97 +0000, Leonard wrote:
><snip>
>
>I rather suspect that the "bubble" around a ship in jump space would
>*not* have a boundary, rather it'd wrap back around itself (picture the
>2d ship on the surface of a small sphere). Of course, to make the
>conditions in the ship normal, the spacetime around the ship would be
>"flat" (the sphere is flattened into a lens shape so the ship is on a
>more or less plane surface). This drastically increases the curvature
>elsewhere. Since curvature of space is the same thing as gravity, this
>explains what happens if you get too far from the surface of the ship.
>The tidal forces from the excessive curvature tear you apart and the
>fragments leak back into normal space.
>
>The "lens" shape is "necessary" *because* things that hit the "edge"
>leak back into normal space. This allows a small bubble. Otherwise you'd
>need a bubble big enough to let the heat radiated by the ship disperse
>greatly without frying the ship. 
>
>Also a "spherical" (actually hyperspherical) bubble would be *really*
>weird for the ship using it. You'd see your ship in all directions. Sort
>of like turning it inside out and blowing it up to the size of the
>bubble.
>
>This also answers the questions about starting a second jump drive
>while in jump. Trying to build another "bubble" inside the first one
>will distort both of them and tear everything apart. Bye-bye ship!
>
>-- 
>Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
> shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
>leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort
>

Exactly the image I am trying to create with my vision of Jump Effect. That
is why the ports are covered during Jump: there is no effective outside, and
if you try to look out, you end up looking back in at yourself instead. Very
disconcerting.

Garry

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 01:17:28 +0000
From: Garry Ward <Garry.E.Ward@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: S:AAB (was: Re: Mileu:E21)

At 10:53 AM 8/16/97 +0000, Matti wrote:
><snip>
>
>	No, don't think it's sour grapes, most of the people know watched 
>one or two episodes and then gave up on the series. IMO S:AAB is a 
>showcase of how _not_ to  make a successful SF series. Ok, the 
>effects were nice, and I loved the special ops episode where Hawks 
>was sent behind enemy lines to sniper down a Chig officer. 
>
>	Anyways, Star Trek (in all of its multi-tentacled, horrifying 
>incarnations) and Babylon 5, and even Earth 2 (way too new age for 
>me, though) are far more popular in Finland than S:AAB ever was.
>
>/RFXn     mlaakso@utu.fi        aka. Matti Laakso
> -Phone: +358-(0)2-237 9928       YO-Kyla 19 A 11
> -IRC: RFXn                       FIN-20540  TURKU
> -Talk: RFXn@delenn.yok.utu.fi    Finland
>

S:AAB A Heinlen concept implemented by Irwin Allen

Garry

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 21:32:18 EDT
From: galliand@juno.com (Scott M Galliand)
Subject: Re: Event Horizon

>It looks like they've got their M-Drives up to Traveller standard, 
>though.  It took some 72 hours for the ship to reach Neptune from 
>Earth.

Um, hate to correct you, but it took 56 days for the Lewis & Clark to get
to Neptune from Earth orbit, not 72 hours.  I saw the movie myself about
four hours ago.

Scott Galliand

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 01:32:39 +0000
From: Garry Ward <Garry.E.Ward@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: 21st c. Terran technology, Vilani psychology, ...

At 06:51 PM 8/16/97 BST-1, Nick wrote:
><snip>
>
>This was something I had to give some thought to when planning an 
>adventure where the players discover an derelict Vilani warship. 
>
>In the good old days of yore, ie Book 5 High Guard, there was a 
>tech level limit on the size of computer you could install in a 
>ship, which in turn imposed a limit on the hull size (I know this 
>must all sound unbearably primitive to all you FF&S fans, but such 
>were conditions then). At tech level 11, that of the First 
>Imperium Vilani, the maximum displacement was 50,000 tons, so a 
>1st Imperium dreadnought would be the size of a 3rd Imperium 
>strike cruiser. 
>
>Things were even worse for the Earthmen. At tech level 10, as they 
>were at the start of the Interstellar Wars (recapping briefly for 
>all those who have chosen not to wade through the sixty thousand 
>lines of text devoted to Solomani tech levels that have been 
>posted to the TML) the maximum ship size was 10,000 tons -- those 
>Vilani must have laughed when they saw the pride of Earth's 
>''national squadrons under a tenuous fleet control by UNSCA'' 
>coming for them, forgetting that it's not how big it is that's 
>important, but how you use it.
>
>Nick
>
>

Good point; I hadn't thought to look at High Guard. I know that the Imperium
board game does not include tonnages on the ships in it; only a Resouce
Units cost for building & supporting (shades of PE!).

Garry

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 23:13:49 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Macpherson <john35@wharton.upenn.edu>
Subject: Alcubierre Drive

Hi all,
	Someone posted information about research into the energy 
requirements for Miguel Alcubierre's "warp drive."  Unfortunately, I 
seem to have lost the two citations.  Could someone please email me them 
to me?  Thanks, and sorry to use the list for this.

- -JM

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 23:19:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: SemoFetus@aol.com
Subject: Re: Questions on Droyne, Empress Wavefront

Dom said:
<<Beyond  the MT data and the CT Alien module and Twilight's Peak (these two
long out of print) there isn't a lot.. The MT library data is quite
extensive though..>>

Hrmph...  Well, thank you very much.  I guess I'll just have to make do and
think for myself!  Darn, hate when I'm called upon to do that.  :)

Dom said this as well:
<<
<snide humour>
Both Leroy and Harold are probably going to tell you that they know what
the plans for the plotline indicated, but they can't tell you... probably
to avoid the Templars killing them;-)
</snide humour>
NB If you do find out, let me know... <g>
>>

Well.  If my chances of finding out are that poor, then I am sad!  Darn
again.  Okay.  Well, you never can tell, eh...

Thanks for the response though.  

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 23:34:03 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Martial Arts in T4.1?

In a message dated 97-08-17 15:23:18 EDT, you write:

<< 
 Fine, but change 'melee' to something like 'martial arts' or 'unarmed 
 combat'.
  >>

Calling it Martial Arts is misleading. It implies Kung Fo or Judo. (I always
liked the illo of the guy with a shotgun and the title "Wester Martial
Arts").

Calling it Unarmed Combat infringes on Brawling.

 

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 23:35:35 -0400
From: Daniel Ray Lane <drlane@pinn.net>
Subject: Re: Re : Grav focussed lasers

> Couldn't grav-plates use gravitic dipoles? IIRC, dipole effects drop  
> off as an inverse-cube, so an inertial compensator that uses a 
> gravitic dipole could be strong nough to hold characters and cargo to 
> the deckplates of a G-maneuvering ship without affecting the ship  
> superstructure or objects outside the ship significantly.
> 
> --
> Richard Hough
> rdhough@orca.bc.ca

Yes.  It could even  be even more complex than this.  From the Luna article
in Dragon (by M. Miller), we know that gravitic systems are based on chip 
type devices.  Using large arrays of these things, one could conceivable  
develop very complex interference effects, quadrapoles, etc...shaping 
just about what ever field configuration you want.

Analagous present day systems include phased array radars, which are 
pretty nifty in their own right.

- -Dan Lane

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 23:34:01 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: T41 Skills Draft A Armorer

In a message dated 97-08-17 08:21:23 EDT, you write:

<< >>    How are you planning to handle the differences in Tech Levels? TL2-3
 >>Armorer is going to know how to craft chain and plate mail from scratch,
 >>swords and perhaps up to flintlock firearms.  However I seriously doubt>>

This question applies to Armorer, Mechanic, Gravitics, Electronics, etc. So
Fred ((from a LoTech world and with Armorer-3) isn't living in a vacuum...

Technology, Training, and Ability
	Individuals come from a variety of technological backgrounds in the
Traveller universe. The abilities conferred by skills are relatively tech
level independent. That is to say, a MidTech individual with appropriate
skill is skilled in the repair and maintenance of specific devices. While he
might not be able to invent new devices at HiTech or VHiTech, he probably can
puzzle out their maintenance and repair, especially if the appropriate
manuals or technical supplies are available.
	For example, Fred has Ground Craft-4. Since he comes from a LoTech world,
much of his experience is with LoTech Ground Vehicles. Later in his life, he
gets a job fixing cars and when he does, he has access to diagnostic
equipment, repair manuals, tools, and parts. Perhaps another mechanic would
fix a car by repairing the axle spindle, but Fred just replaces the whole
assembly. He has skill in achieving the end, but the way he gets there is
shaped by his background.

	Armorer (Soldier)	Dex, Int
	Armorer skill is an expertise in the care of and repair of weaponry. The
individual can operate, maintain, and repair military and civilian weapons.
This expertise extends to small arms (hand weapons), heavy weapons,
artillery, and ship=92s weapons. Weapons are made to be maintained and
repaired; an armorer=92s experience and background includes a working knowledge
of currently available weapons, a historical knowledge of other weapons, and
an ability to find references which help in handling otherwise unknown
weapons.
	Identification. An Armorer can identify weapons after an examination of 
the weapon itself or of images of it.

	To identify an unknown weapon.
	(Int + Armorer) < Difficult (2.5D)
	Difficulty of this task will vary by specific weapon and whether images or
the weapon itself is available.

	Maintenance. An Armorer is responsible for preventative maintenance of
weaponry, carefully disassembling the equipment, cleaning it, replacing worn
parts, and then reassembling it.

	To perform preventative maintenance on a weapon.
	(Dex + Armorer) < Average (2D)
	Uncertain (1D). This task assumes proper tools and manuals are available.

	Repair. An Armorer is responsible for repair of weaponry in a unit or
organization, or on a ship.

	To repair a weapon which has malfunctioned.
	(Int + Armorer) < Difficult (2.5D)
	Uncertain (1D). This task assumes proper tools and manuals are available.

	Depending on the circumstances, this task may have other levels of
difficulty or uncertainty.
	Armorer is one of five members of the Soldier skill cluster (the others =
are Ground Craft, Camouflage, Demolitions, Heavy Weapons, Tactics).

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1706
***********************************
Traveller-digest      Monday, August 18 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1707



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Event Horizon
...artwork (was T4+)
Re: FF&S2 - One more thing that's missing
Steward Skill (Long)
Re: Event Horizon
Re: Asia in Traveller
Re: Question for Marc & a second question
Re:T41 Skills Draft
Re: T41 Skills Draft B Bureaucracy
Re: Mileu:E21
Re: ...artwork (was T4+)
Re: E21 Chronology
Net Illiterate
Re: ...artwork (was T4+)
Re: FF&S2
Re: T4+ 
Re: S:AAB (was: Re: Mileu:E21)
Re:  Economics 101 (was Re: Femicide)

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 22:40:39 +0000
From: Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: Event Horizon

> Um, hate to correct you, but it took 56 days for the Lewis & Clark to get
> to Neptune from Earth orbit, not 72 hours.  I saw the movie myself about
> four hours ago.

I stand corrected!

Kenneth.

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 23:39:49 -0400
From: Tom Trelenberg <tomt@scri.fsu.edu>
Subject: ...artwork (was T4+)

> Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 17:51:59 -0400
> From: Daniel Ray Lane
> Subject: T4+
>
> OK.
>
> Here's an honest question.  And it's a hard one.  Aside from a few
> admittedly wonderful pictures (the T4 cover, Psionics Institutes,
> and maybe Central Supply catalog, along with a few others), who really
> thinks Chris Foss' artwork depicts Traveller in ANY ERA?
>
> I'm sorry, because I like some of his artwork, but it doesn't look
> realistic in most cases.  It doesn't look like Trveller.  Traveller
> is a hard SF game and Chris' art really doesn't have that feel for me.
> I noticed that the Lintula Sunrise is a good old "type S" wedge
> configutation vice the fluid blob shown in "Starships."  Now THAT's
> Traveller.
>
> - -Dan Lane
>
Well...we'll probably take it for this...but I'd have to agree with
you.  I find some of that artwork pretty darn annoying.  I like some of
it....mostly the one's you've mentioned (CSC and PsiInst--I really liked
the PsiInst picture in the last JTAS Contact: The Suerrat article, when
it was "expanded" and "hazed up" a bit!)  But what is that THING coming
out of the nose of the ship on Anomalies....or those "claws" on EA.

I would like to see (I in no way pretend to represent anyone other than
myself) more of the Larry Elmore B&W artwork as seen inside the T4
rulebook.  I may take some hits for this, but I just don't think I've
taken enough recreational drugs to fully appreciate the Chris Foss
stuff.

All this to say....."me too, Dan!"

TT

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 97 22:42:43 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: FF&S2 - One more thing that's missing

On 08/17/97 at 04:20 PM,  jeff.zeitlin@earth.execnet.com (Jeff Zeitlin)
said:

>I can't say I'm _displeased_ with FF&S2; it does its job, and does it
>well.  However, there is one section that was omitted, and that omission
>disappoints me.

>Alternative technology has always held a sort of fascination for me - what
>would it be like if we had _that_ instead of _this_? What else would I
>have to change, and how would it be changed? Could the technologies
>coexist?  At what cost?  Why would one be better than the other, or why
>_wouldn't_ one be better than another.  FF&S1 didn't explore this deeply
>enough, but it _did_ at least give jumping-off points.  FF&S2 doesn't.  I
>want the supplement.

Jeff, I'm with you on this one!  I *use* alternative technology in my
games...a LOT of alternative technology. ;->  

I don't think TML is the place to develop Stutterwarps and Stutterjumps,
Psionic Drives, Hyper Drives, Dean Drives, Ether Propellers, Exotic Matter
Drives, Casimir Powercells, M/AM power plants, CNO fusion, Blasters, Neural
Whips, Grav Scanners (I don't think they are in FFS2 are they?), and all
manner of other SF technology. Can you imagine the noise to signal ration?
;->  

I *hope* GDW-Beta becomes a *hotbed* of alternative technology development
during the next few months...how about it Guy?  If not there, maybe MPGN
would create another list for us here.  I *would* have suggested ISBA, as
an alternative site, but they are more focused on using what we already
have rather than developing new technology.

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

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 23:32:37 -0500
From: Alex Ingram <ingram@airmail.net>
Subject: Steward Skill (Long)

Eris Reddoch wrote:
> 
> On 08/15/97 at 09:09 PM,  John Wood <John@elvw.demon.co.uk> said:
> 
> >> One skill from th CT days that is not present in T4 is the Steward
> >>skill. While I admit that it was a weak skill, "care and feeding of
> >>passengers", I think that it has some potential if expanded.

Let me expand of the role of the Steward:

True, the primary duty of the Steward is to attend to passenger and crew
comforts, services and safety. Stewarts are responsible for daily
housekeeping services and stocking the ship with necessary commissary
items, janitorial supplies, bed and bath linens, water, oxygen, medical
supplies, drugs, foods, beverages and other consumables. They often play
the part of waiter, bartender, clerk, valet, trainer, barber/hair
stylist, announcer/DJ, entertainer, activities director, florist,
masseur, casino dealer, dry cleaner, pet groomer, tailor, nanny,
counselor, nurse and cook (This is where the JOT skill would be quite
real). Many Stewards are also travel agents, tour guides and cruise
directors, conducting passenger tours of the ship, as well as
facilitating planetside and starport excursions (usually for fees). They
also schedule entertainment activities and onboard music/holomovies/VR
games, and update the entertainment software selection and electronic
news data-packets periodically. Their computer skills allow them to
program VR entertainment and create multimedia and holographic
presentations. They may also perform public relations, customer service
and entertainment computer help desk functions to passengers and crew
members. Many times they perform some journal-keeping and bookkeeping
roles. They deal with starport and custom officials and sometimes have
to run interference for passengers in trouble with the local law or
powers to be. And as you commented they also are critical in recruiting
passengers.

Stewards instruct passengers on shipboard safety procedures and run
lifeboat drills. They also insure that all safety-related shipboard
equipment and lifeboats are in proper working order and perform periodic
preventive maintenance (PM). In emergencies, the Stewards role is to
insure the safe evacuation of passengers to lifeboats, then perform
damage control and fire fighting duties. Damage Control (personally, I
think this should be a separate skill) can involve dealing with loose
high-voltage lines, dangerous cargo and fuel leaks, oxygen line fires,
solar radiation exposure, explosive decompression, vacuum conditions,
sharp floating debris and exploding ships ordnance, to mention a few
fun things. On some ships Damage Control Suits (similar to a lightly
armored vac-suit) are standard issue to damage control team personnel.
Stewards also perform hazardous materials (HazMat) containment and
decontamination duties as well. Obviously, a variety of different skills
could come to bear in damage control work.

Stewards also handle crew and passenger compartment maintenance and PM
duties including regulating and monitoring life support/environmental
(HVAC) systems, ships plumbing/waste disposal systems, damage
control/fire-fighting and safety-related systems, entertainment and
passenger compartment communications sub-systems and maintaining the
ships galley, laundry room, gym/health spa, entertainment suite,
casino, ships commissary, and, if also the medic, the sickbay.

As a cook (SL-0 to 2) or chef (SL-3+) (again, I would like to see this a
skill unto itself) the Steward is knowledgeable in preparing a variety
of foods for different cultures, religions and races as well as
selecting wines, liqueurs, spirits and non-alcoholic beverages. They are
responsible for stocking the galley with standard and specialty foods
and beverages and insuring their proper handling and storage. The higher
the Stewards' skill level the more variety of high quality meats,
seafood (sometimes live) and poultry available onboard. To this end,
most Stewards of SL-3+ generally get free rein as to what they want to
spend for their passengers' comforts. They also monitor and resupply the
drinking- and waste-water supply and insure its purity.

Many Stewards find themselves as the ships medic also. This many times
includes supporting the low passage berths as well as running the
pharmacy and medical lab.

On occasions, Stewards perform some limited security functions such as
conducting searches of passengers, luggage or cargo for weapons,
contraband or dangerous products, securing passenger valuables (in the
ships safe or secured cargo hold) or providing executive security to an
onboard VIP. In the rare event (depending of the GM) the ship is under
attack by pirates or worst, the Steward may be called upon to help repel
boarders or even man the turrets. Thus weapons and gunnery skills are
critical import.

Another equally important function Stewards perform are the duties of
CargoMaster (CM)(or LoadMaster to you Air Force types)(Yes, I think this
should be a separate skill!). Using Hydraulic ExoFrames (HEFs),
AntiGravLifts (AGLs) or other cargo-handling equipment to 
on-load/off-load cargoes the CM understands how to obtain the most
effective utilization of the ships cargo hold to maximize the amount of
cargo carried. Many cargoes, such as those packaged using custom-fitted
cargo bladders or containers will provide near maximum cargo hold
utilization (up to 99%) without even requiring CM skills (especially
with bulk cargoes such as grains, ores or liquids), but the majority of
cargo-to-cargo hold situations are a problem of mathematics and
experience. Attempting to load a quantity of loose freight, mail or
odd-shaped cargo without having a CM skill would deliver a default
maximum cargo efficiency rating of 75% of capacity (at least thats the
way I use it). Each additional skill level of CM can increase the cargo
capability by 4% up to a maximum of 99%. No way to get 100% capacity
even with a SL-9!

CMs also have an understanding of how to handle dangerous (i.e.,
explosive, flammable, corrosive) and live (animals, plants,
microbiologicals, seeds) cargoes needing special handling and care. For
many standard, dangerous, fragile or live cargoes the CM skill level
would also determine the amount of cargo damaged (i.e., dead animals,
destroyed plants, crushed products, spilled liquids, broken viruses
vials, etc.) during on- and off-loading (maybe due to poor cargo hold
placement, lack of proper care or bad handling. This would be a serious
factor in profitability to any ship captain. 

Maybe you'll give the Steward more respect now!

Alex Ingram
ingram@airmail.net

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 13:47:51 +0730
From: kenji@accessone.com (Kenji Schwarz)
Subject: Re: Event Horizon

Scott Galliand wrote:

>>It looks like they've got their M-Drives up to Traveller standard,
>>though.  It took some 72 hours for the ship to reach Neptune from
>>Earth.
>
>Um, hate to correct you, but it took 56 days for the Lewis & Clark to get
>to Neptune from Earth orbit, not 72 hours.  I saw the movie myself about
>four hours ago.
>
>Scott Galliand

Just got back myself.

WHUFFO they need grav tanks for?  For the 30G acceleration, ya say?  Outa
their ion-freakin'-drive?  Aw jeez.  FF&S2 *IS* totally screwed, ain't it?
It's all you gearheads' fault, too!

WHUFFO this top-secret experimental probe a passenger compartment bigger 'n
Versailles?  They expecting the freakin' Sun King to pavanning his ruffles
off up and down the thing?  (Bet the acoustics'd be great in there for
chamber music.)

WHUFFO all these deep-space exploration and rescue vessels got fifteen foot
ceilings?  So the Dream Team'll have enough head room to whup all the
brainwashed-genetically-engineered-Red-Chinese-trained-by-rogue-madmen-from-
the-Former-Soviet-Union-Demons-From-Dimension-X?

WHUFFO they didn't SEND the Dream Team?  'Least they can ACT, fer cryin'
out loud.

WHUFFO ol' Justin could go on yacking his damn-fool head off in an airlock
that was 20perfreakincent decompressed?  WHUFFO the Jet-Propelled Wonder
can shout howdy into his vacc suit outside the ship's window and they can
hear him?  Is the atmosphere of Neptune "A"-class or WHAT?  Exotic, my
alveoli.

WHUFFO they gotta stick that blippety-blah techno whine music crap over the
closing credits?  Tryin'a score some cool off _Blade Runner_, huh?  It'd be
insulting if it wasn't so pathetic.

WHUFFO the forces of "ultimate chaos and ultimate evil" can't think of
nothing naughtier than face-slashing and evsiceration?  Send some freakin'
talent coaches through that scaly gyroscope thing before you go braggin' to
me about ultimate anything, puh-leeze.  (I hear Richard Simmons needs
work.)  If I want eternal torment, I'll just hop into the _Priscilla, Queen
of the Desert_ pocket universe, ta very much.

WHUFFO they just didn't get Pinhead to pop his spiky sternness into the
film?  At least Pinhead's got some CLASS about the whole thing.  I mean,
they rip off, whoops, excuse me, "pay tribute" to half a dozen films their
better, so why not go for the TOTAL self-referential po-mo experience and
bring in Barker's Big Buff Bloody Beastliness?  Eh?  I've read Foucault and
LIKED IT, and I'll show *you* hell, Mr.
Screenwriter-Producer-Director-Pinkboy sheep!

WHUFFO there aren't no Navy, Marines, or Army sent in?  Where's their
cutlasses, dammit?  Totally unbelievably unrealistic.  Didn't they read
Book 1?

WHUFFO "the Government" sees their ultra-secret gazillion-dollar mystery
science project is back, and they send one (1) ambulance to go check the
tires?

WHUFFO they forgot to bring lil' Jones, the ship's cat?  What were they smok=
ing?

WHUFFO they're tryin' ta scare us by heading to Proxima Centauri and some
bored and boring megalomaniac bat-lizard that Grampy forgot to nail way
back when?  That's supposed to be hell?  When they coulda headed for
Barnard's Star?  And been forced to negotiate with Vilani service station
clerks?  Who call in their managers?  (Stop reading now if you're one to
get nighmares)  And their UNION REPRESENTATIVES?  Yeah, yeah, gouge my eyes
out and roger me with a meathook for all eternity, I'm real scared!
Puh-leeze, Mr. Event Horizon, just don't throw me in that there 'gateway',
whatever you do!  (snicker).

And El Whuffo Supremo:  WHUFFO them pointy-headed apes burning unrefined
fuel for?  Huh?  Didn't they READ the little black books?  'Course the
sumbitch is gonna misjump.  Those cretins got off easy.  I'd a tanned their
hides but good, lemme tell ya.

A furore beta-gradii delivere nos, O Dominatrice!

[This review was generated by Kenjomatic 2.0=81, running on a standard Johnn=
y
[Walker Black Label operating system.

[Classified SubGenius Foundation deconstruction (TOP SECRET) of this cinema
unit [available upon request (big red straps not included).

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 97 23:21:07 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: Asia in Traveller

On 08/17/97 at 05:35 PM,  CardSharks@aol.com said:

>But the first emperor is Hiroshi I.

>At least it wasn't Miller.

Wait a minute!  Isn't Hiroshi, nipponese for Miller? <gd&r>

Personally, I play the Vilani as pretty asian in nature...western of me, I
know, but that's what I am. 

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

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 97 23:33:54 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: Question for Marc & a second question

On 08/17/97 at 02:32 PM,  Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca> said:

>If you don't want your players to powergame, you should encourage them to
>get skills >5. Real power gamers will all have skills of 1... and
>characteristics of 15. Easy to get, if you let them roll on the physical
>and mental development tables whenever they want.

>I do not have the T4.1 chargen rules. Do they address this problem?

Yes and no. The draft I'm been looking at allows players to pick the table
for the roll, but you have to roll for the specific skill.  All careers
have one table with the 3 physical characteristics and another table with
the 2 mental characteristics.  This gives our hypothetical powergamer a
pretty good chance to boost a characteristic or two every term with the 4
or 5 rolls he gets each turn. OTOH, you don't have the pick/pick method as
a printed option that *really* allowed stat-boosting.

Personally, I'd rather characteristic advances be made *very* expensive,
let the player advance a characteristic OR roll for the 4 skills he gets
during the term.  Then if you've *just*got*to*have* that STR+1 then you can
get it, but it's gonna cost you!

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

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 97 23:56:04 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re:T41 Skills Draft

On 08/17/97 at 01:01 PM,  Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca> said:

>>A graduate student in chemistry (Edu-7, Chemistry-2) could probably
>>handle this task.

>If skill levels are supposed to represent roughly 1 year of experience in
>a skill, then I would think a graduate student in chemistry would have
>considerably more than a skill of 2. Sure, a grad student who spent time
>studying Research, Carousing, or Instruction instead of his or her major
>may have low skill levels, but I think a typical grad student would have a
>skill level of 4 or 5 in his or her major.

Richard, this *is* something that the T4.1 draft handles a little better. 
The player can roll for a skill OR pick his declared major.  The grad
student with a declared major in chemistry could concievablly have a
Chem-2, but it would be his choice. He could also have a Chem-4 or 5.  Of
course, if he did he wouldn't have those Research, Carousing, Instruction,
Biology, or Admin skills he could have learned instead of Chemistry.

IMO, there should be *6* skills per term, plus promotion and maybe even a
"hobby" skill.  If Chem-1 represents a year of study, then that could
represent as much as 2000 hours of study/work...that's *too* much. 

What I'm doing is making a skill-1 be 8 months of study/work (2 semesters)
at 0.75 effort (the other quarter goes into the character's "hobby).  This
works out to 6 skills over the 4 year period PLUS time for 2 "hobby"
skills.  From the test characters I've done I like these better than the 4
or 5 skills per term in Marc's draft.  One problem is the characteristic
advances...I've skirted that one by pulling them out of the tables, and
letting characteristics be picked at a cost of 4 skills.

Yes, 8 per term is a lot, but if they go into *more* skills rather than
much higher levels for the same number of skills, it works out very well.
Like Ken, I *want* skill levels to go up some..not to outlandish levels,
but up some.  I also want a broader selection of skills, instead of 9 or 10
skills, I'd like to see characters with 14 or 15 skills. Actually *I* like
characters with around 20. ;->

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

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 97 00:07:26 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: T41 Skills Draft B Bureaucracy

On 08/17/97 at 09:30 AM,  Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca> said:

>In my mind, Administration is the skill of actually knowing
>rules & regs, and in completing paperwork quickly and correctly. Anyone
>who has worked in an office knows this has little to do with how much
>respect you get from superiors.

I agree with Richard.  I see Admin as knowing the rules, regs and the
*shortcuts* to getting things done.  When Jo the Trader needs to get the
paperwork completed and approved by 4 different offices before he can
unload and transport his cargo to his buyer, he uses Admin.  When Hope the
Naval Officer needs to get the Yardmaster to move her ship's repair to the
top of the list and she does it by knowing the proper forms to fill out,
exactly how to fill out those forms, who should get those forms, and how to
get the forms to the top of that person's inbox, she uses Admin.

Admin doesn't make the character *look* competent in a bureaucracy...it
let's the character *BE* competent in working inside a bureaucracy.

BTW, I'm not gonna push for it's inclusion, but Scrounging is an important
skill that isn't listed. It's not really Admin, nor Trade or Broker (the
way they are defined), but characters are *always* Scrounging around for
something or other.  ;->

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

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 01:41:28 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: Re: Mileu:E21

Leonard Erickson writes: 

>>    Well there were some things that could have been explained better,
>> but I did note that the fighters and other spacecraft didn't use magic
>> plates to make them move through space.
>
>No, they used magic reaction drives that let fighter sized ships launch
>from earth and rendevous with a task force at Jupiter without
>refueling. And do so in only a few hours (*nobody* can fly a fighter
>longer than that, between fatigue and the lack of a bathroom...)

   About the same time it takes the Enterprise of Star Trek to travel at
impluse to the same location.

   As for flying a fighter for long duration, the pilots of those F-111s
that bombed Libya back in the 80s flew for *much* longer than three
hours.  As I recall, so did a number of other American fighter pilots
when they deployed to the Gulf during operation Desert Shield/Storm.

   In fact there are so *many* pilots of single or dual seat fighters
that fly for more than three hours straight, I'm surprised that you
would make such a statement.

>They also had the Trojan asteroids within sight of Jupiter. And aliens
>heading for Earth going past the task force at velocities so low that
>several minutes of combat at visual ranges were possible...

   I won't make excuses for Trojan asteroids that turn up where they
aren't suppose to be (the number of basic astronomical violations Star
Trek and even Traveller have made over the years is enough to make
Galileo spin at 78 rpms in his grave).  However, since we have no idea
what the Chigs were thinking (maybe they were just being cautious or
preparing to send in scouts out ahead of the main body), I don't think
their cruising speed is a very valid point of criticism.

>Sorry, but the science in S:AAB *sucked*.

   I didn't say it couldn't have been better, just that it protrayed
things more realistically than a lot of other sci-fi.

Regards,

Harold

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 97 00:46:08 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: ...artwork (was T4+)

On 08/17/97 at 11:39 PM,  Tom Trelenberg <tomt@scri.fsu.edu> said:

>I would like to see (I in no way pretend to represent anyone other than
>myself) more of the Larry Elmore B&W artwork as seen inside the T4
>rulebook.  I may take some hits for this, but I just don't think I've
>taken enough recreational drugs to fully appreciate the Chris Foss
>stuff.

Well, I guess you two weren't around for the "Art Wars" when T4 first came
out, huh?  ;->  Chris Foss's work was harshly reviewed by several people,
and it was either Ken Bearden or Joe Walsh that kept asking.."Is the
illustration on page ## you're idea of Traveller?"  

Personally, I like the B&W drawings inside T4.0, too. Is that Larry Elmore?
Yep it is (just looked).  I also liked Reynolds and which ever Keith used
to do drawings. The cover of MT's Imperial Encyclopedia sticks in my
mind...the guy hanging in the air by his Gravbelt while scanning across a
gorge, some kind of grav craft off in the distance and hanging
buildings...now *that* was TRAVELLER art!

OTOH, I liked the LBB's and they had NO art at all.  

Eris

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

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 01:59:18 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: Re: E21 Chronology

Michael Koehne wrote:
> 
> Moin Harold Hale,
> 
> > (we don't even have the partially
> > completed space station Clarke mentions started, nor have we established
> > a single permanent base from which we can search for monoliths).
> 
>         you forgot MIR, ok the last half year was'nt so good, I think
>         they'll hang him. Sovjet space technolgie relies on humans
>         ( they even sometimes dock in a way that they throw a cable
>         by hand ) A failed repair, energy and life support loss etc,
>         but MIR is still up, they have new people there and thing all
>         will be fine again in half a year. I hope ERNO (in bremen
>         which is my home town ;-) will sell them a new life support
>         system.

   The space station in _2001_ is several generations ahead of Mir.  Mir
is late 70s technology, somewhat more advanced than America's Skylab. 
It *is* operational, more than can be said of the American et al. "Space
Station Freedom" or whatever they are calling it now.

> > >We could use 3D star maps too. <G>
> >
> >    Not in our lifetime.  I don't relish the prospect of having to
> > conduct my Traveller scenarios down at the local planetarium.  :-)
> 
>         think about having a computer generated map printed for
>         any system characters enter before session.

   2300 AD used a "realistic" star map, which took a three dimensional
image of space and turned it into a two dimensional one.  It was a
*pain* to use, and God help you if you wanted to go another star
system.  Truly realistic star maps will not become a reality until you
can convince a game company to produce space modelling software (and
make it a standard part of the game) that can be run on a laptop
computer (Pentium or Pentium II unless you mind cheesy graphics), *and*
the cost of laptop computers comes *way* down.

Regards,

Harold

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 16:30:35 -0900
From: Harry <paharris@postoffice.newnham.utas.edu.au>
Subject: Net Illiterate

errr... can anyone please tell me what WHUFFO means (Kenji???... could you
enlighten me... oh... nice review by the way!!)


Harry

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 08:43:18 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Tommy Grav <tommy.grav@astro.uio.no>
Subject: Re: ...artwork (was T4+)

On Sun, 17 Aug 1997, Tom Trelenberg wrote:

> > Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 17:51:59 -0400

> Well...we'll probably take it for this...but I'd have to agree with
> you.  I find some of that artwork pretty darn annoying.  I like some of
> it....mostly the one's you've mentioned (CSC and PsiInst--I really liked
> the PsiInst picture in the last JTAS Contact: The Suerrat article, when
> it was "expanded" and "hazed up" a bit!)  But what is that THING coming
> out of the nose of the ship on Anomalies....or those "claws" on EA.

Just my opinion, but I think the strange thing "sticking out" of the
nose on the ship on Anomalies is supposed to be a destroyed monorail 
track the ship is sent to investigate. I read this in a book with Chris
Foss art I think. The painting then at least makes sence, to me that is.  
> 
> I would like to see (I in no way pretend to represent anyone other than
> myself) more of the Larry Elmore B&W artwork as seen inside the T4
> rulebook.  I may take some hits for this, but I just don't think I've
> taken enough recreational drugs to fully appreciate the Chris Foss
> stuff.
> 
> All this to say....."me too, Dan!"
> 
> TT
> 
Ditto!!!

Tommy Grav                  tommy.grav@astro.uio.no    
Institute of Astrophysics   http://www.uio.no/~tommygr/
University in Oslo          "If you value your lives, be somwhere 
Norway                       else!" - Ambassador Delenn B5 

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 09:20:09 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Tommy Grav <tommy.grav@astro.uio.no>
Subject: Re: FF&S2

On Sat, 16 Aug 1997, Douglas E. Berry wrote:
> The point of FFS2 is to be able to design all sorts of ships, vehicles, and
> gadgets for your Traveller campaign.  That's it.  The original FFS copy
> read something like "other games give you a catalog, we give you the factory."
> 
> FFS2 is not an easy product to use, but if you perservere you end up with
> amazing results.  Probably the best thing about the whole concept is that
> you get away from generic "autopistols" and "Free Traders".. You can have a
> GT CombatMaster in your holster as you pilot your CBW "Roland" class Far
> Trader.
> 
> FFS is a tool to allow a greater variety in your game.

But I dont need a design system that doesn't tell me if this gun is a good
gun, what the problems with it is and so on. For that I need a system to
use the gadets I have designed. If there is no system to compare the
gadets with I can just describe the gun with words using no design sytems
as I can't compare to guns anyway.

Tommy Grav                  tommy.grav@astro.uio.no    
Institute of Astrophysics   http://www.uio.no/~tommygr/
University in Oslo          "If you value your lives, be somwhere 
Norway                       else!" - Ambassador Delenn B5 

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 10:40:06 +2
From: "RFXn" <mlaakso@utu.fi>
Subject: Re: T4+ 

On 17 Aug 97 at 17:51, Daniel Ray Lane wrote:

> Here's an honest question.  And it's a hard one.  Aside from a few
> admittedly wonderful pictures (the T4 cover, Psionics Institutes,
> and maybe Central Supply catalog, along with a few others), who
> really thinks Chris Foss' artwork depicts Traveller in ANY ERA?

	I second that. Foss is a great artist, but some of his paintings 
used in T4 actually predate Traveller. They have absolutely nothing 
to do with the game. The look and feel of his technology goes 
way off the mark.

	As for the other "artist".. send him back to T$R to doodle his
chainmail-bikini bimbos with big swords. :) Give me Caswell, Blair
or Peters any day!

/RFXn     mlaakso@utu.fi        aka. Matti Laakso
 -Phone: +358-(0)2-237 9928       YO-Kyla 19 A 11
 -IRC: RFXn                       FIN-20540  TURKU
 -Talk: RFXn@delenn.yok.utu.fi    Finland

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 03:40:00 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: Re: S:AAB (was: Re: Mileu:E21)

Garry Ward writes:

>S:AAB A Heinlein concept implemented by Irwin Allen

   No, advertised as:

   'X Files meets Heinlein'

   Actually had a flavor more like:

   'Combat (the old WW II series with Vic Morrow) meets Heinlein'

Regards,

Harold

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 23:55:05 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Re:  Economics 101 (was Re: Femicide)

Bruce Johnson wrote

> On Sat, 16 Aug 1997, Peter Newman wrote:
> 
> > Douglas E. Berry wrote
> > > My biggest
> > > fear is the social disruption as the hordes of men go looking for wives,
> > > and the find that they have to fight over them.
> > 
> > This problem should resolve itself due to basic economics.  As the
> > quantity supplied of an item [brides] is reduced while the demand for
> > the product [brides] remains constant the market clearing price for this
> > item will rise. I.E. if there are fewer women to marry those that are
> > there will command higher bride prices, this will alter the perceived
> > value of female children, and the market for female babies will regain
> > equilibrium.

> The problem, is that in the places we're talking about, you still have to
> _pay_ the groom to get your daughter married. Women are considered
> liabilities from the moment they're born...it will take a LOT of upheaval
> before people actually _pay_ the fathers of the bride to get married.

Yes, so what ?  This is _still_ Econ 101.  If the quantity supplied is
reduced and demand is not the price _will_ go up.  Economists have done
some work on the question of dowries and IIRC one conclusion is that the
brideprice is money paid to the groom to cover the net present value of
the money he will spend in the future to support her (minus his
perceived net present value of the support she will give him).

As an example suppose that the groom will spend $1,000 per year on the
bride but the services he receives from her are only worth $800 per year
to him.  He is loosing $200 per year by being married.  The brides
family will have to give him money to make up for this loss. He will
want the net present value to him (at his personal discount rate) of the
money he will pay out for the shorter of their lives.  If the number of
women out alive were to be reduced the value of the remainder would
rise.  If the value the groom placed on the brides services were to rise
by only 30% then her services would be worth $1,040 a year to him.  Thus
getting married would gain him money.  He would then be willing to pay
to achieve this gain.

When there are not as many women being born the value of each one will
go up.  The fact that many countries require a dowry rather than paying
a brideprice just means it will take longer there.

> After all, killing your wife because she didn't bring in enough dowry is
> still relatively common in rural India. You keep what she brought in, and
> _hey_ you're single again! Try again!
> 
> Also, this is a deeply engrained human behavior, dowries or their
> equivalent, persist in nearly all culture to this day. Why do you think
> it's traditional for the _brides_ family to pay for the (often lavish)
> wedding?

Dowries are more common then brideprices because there are more
countries where the groom perceives the bride as an economic drain than
the converse.  This has some cultural force and this would create
friction in the economic transaction that as the heart of the marriage
and therefore it is quite possible that brideprices would not replace
dowries as rapidly as they would in a world of perfect information.

To reduce this to its simplest level most human males desire intimate
aquaintance from human women.  Billions of years of evolution have made
this a very strong demand [If your parents did not have kids you
probably won't either.]  Therefore the demand for women is fairly
inelastic [and has few substitute goods] and therefore the price will go
up rapidly as quantity supplied goes down.  If there are fewer human
women grooms will have to pay more to get them.

Of course economics is really just the behavior of the selfish genes
that make up the body doing what is in their own best interests but
that  is another story.

Peter Newman - who would have a PhD in Economics today if he did not
hate higher (past calculus) math enough that grad school was no fun :)

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1707
***********************************
Traveller-digest      Monday, August 18 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1708



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Net Illiterate
Re: The Future of Traveller  (was Re: ARRRRGGGHHH!!!! )
FF&S2 Errata?
Re: T41 Skills Draft B Bureaucracy
Re: T41 Skills Draft A Academic
Re: Stutterwarp & Heisenberg
Re: Re : Grav focussed lasers
Re: Flawed accumulator energy densities
Re: FF&S2 - One more thing that's missing
Re: Spacefaring nations and economics
Auction Update #17: RPG Items (AD&D, Space 1889, Traveller)
TRTOOLS V0.94 finished!

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 16:34:11 +0730
From: kenji@accessone.com (Kenji Schwarz)
Subject: Re: Net Illiterate

>errr... can anyone please tell me what WHUFFO means (Kenji???... could you
>enlighten me... oh... nice review by the way!!)
>
>
>Harry

Ah, "WHUFFO" isn't an acronym, IGTS[1], but merely the emphatic form of
"whuffo," i.e., "what for????" (how come?  WHY, LORD, WHY?) as pronounced
by me when I slink out of the office and take off the suit and tie.

And stoked by your misdirected praise and another drink, let me share a
couple other WHUFFO moments:

WHUFFO they think ringing eardrums are scary?  I don't get it... am I
normal?  Like, that IS why they put in all those loud pointless noises,
huh?

WHUFFO they're choking on their own bad breath and scrounging for CO2
scrubbers and they're air-conditioning O'Hare airport?  These are
"rescuers?"

WHUFFO this so-called "search-and-rescue" team manages to break EVERY
=46REAKING RULE IN THE BOOK?  Did they break the Don't Shine Flashlights in
Satan's Face Rule?  YES!  Did they break the Arrive Fashionably Late Rule?
YES!  Did they break the Don't Try to Leave Rule?  YES!  Did they break the
Don't Heft Weapons and Brag Rule?  YES!  Did they break the Don't Move
Backwards Rule?  Did they break the Shoot Scientists on Sight Rule?  YES!
And on and on and on...   These numbnuts oughta have their freakin'
licenses pulled, along with their viscera... where the hell'd they train, a
guest spot on "ER"?

WHUFFO "the Government" didn't think to find out what the voice hidden in
the last transmission said, instead of getting lucky that some
potato-eatin' paramedic remembers a bit of Latin (on the second try!) that
the good Fadders taught him, when it's already too late?  No FREAKIN WONDER
that "the Government" is to embarrassed to name itself.  THAT'S the answer
to the Milieu:2100AD conundrum about national represention -- they're all
TOO DAMN LAME AND KNOW IT to use their own names.

WHUFFO there's frost on the goddamn windows?  The inside's supposed to be
heated; the outside's supposed to be outer space, righty-right?

WHUFFO they bother putting a screenwriter in the credits?  Haunting of Hill
House Maltese Falcon Blade Runner Hellraiser Prince of Darkness Alien
Aliens Bunches o' Aliens Outland Friday the Thirteenth Nightmare on Elm
Street 2001 ha!

WHUFFO they get my hopes up about a "dimension of ultimate evil" for
something really scary and Chairman Bill doesn't come though the gateway to
inflict terrible, terrible hairdos on humanity?  I guess by 2057 AD they've
figured out that the locus of cosmic ickiness is the Microsoft Corporate
Campus.

WHUFFO they got themselves a Ripley Clone, whuffo they get in innuendos
about who-all she'd like to bunk down with, timid innuendos though they may
be, and so then WHUFFO she's gotta be this bit a spindly blonde do-nothing
fluff?  Sigourney's starting to look good.


[1] I'm Glad To Say

PS  I'm glad to realize I'll soon regret posting all this later... but
confession is good for the soul, after all.  It'll keep me out of
Yaskodray's scaly malevolent little paws, dontcha know.

PPS  Anyone do much with Call of Cthulhu meets Traveler?  I really really
like the idea, which is partially why I'm sorta disappointed with _Event
Horizon_.  When writing up the Sayat minor race, I was going to give it a
Lovecraftean spin, but shelved the whole thing.

The Kenjomatic 2.0=81 is now going offline for routine maintenance.

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 00:17:46 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Re: The Future of Traveller  (was Re: ARRRRGGGHHH!!!! )

Charles Li wrote

[much snippage throughout]

> >>If you want a system that follows reality (which is what the
> >>term "hard sf" *means*) then it *has* to be complex, simply because
> >>reality is complex.
> >
> >Oh, cripes.... give me a break.... like anybody in here has any idea
> >what all of this bullshittium technology is going to look like
> >anyway.... Making it 'complex' in the name of 'reality' is simply
> >anal-retentivness for its own sake. Militant attitudes like yours have
> >crippled the game system to the point where nobody besides a gearhead
> >game-geek loaded down with old TNE supplements can make use of it.

> >Jesus H. God-dancing CHRIST, Leonard! Did you read ANY of my post? I
> >mean really READ it? I can FIGURE OUT what the flying #$%^% a
> >light-second is in real life, and so can anybody: BUT HOW THE FLYING
> >FRACK DOES THIS IMPACT ON THE GAME SYSTEM???!!!????
> >Are you wholly impervious to logic? IG should have done this and IG
> >should have explained that and IG should have done some other damned
> >thing.... AM I THE ONLY ONE HERE WHO IS INFURIATED AT THE FUNDAMENTAL
> >TIME & MONEY-WASTING ABSURDITY OF A GAME SYSTEM THAT HAS BEEN AROUND 
> > FOR BETTER THAN A YEAR AND HAS SPAWNED THREE SHIP DESIGN SYSTEMS TWO > > OF WHICH CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT ARE FOUND NOWHERE ELSE. 
> >Since what we have is simply recycled TNE 
> > and since TNE was stillborn on the market as soon as it
> >came out and doomed the company that produced it to a premature
> >bankruptcy

This is an oversimplification.  Rather TNE was not able to sell enough
to prevent this.  GDW was not just Traveller, it was also a bunch of
wargames - and wargames do not sell either.

> > DID IT OCCUR TO YOU THAT THIS MIGHT INFLICT THE SAME FATE 
> > ON IMPERIUM GAMES?

> >The original Traveller came in thin, floppy, user-friendly booklets 
> that
> >were inexpensive to buy and easy to read for your average-bright teen 
> on
> >an allowance. It would have been great to go back to that level of
> >simplicity, with a more complex design/combat system hovering in the
> >background for those who wanted to make use of it. Instead, we've got
> >what we have... which is precisely zero. I don't understand how to 
> build
> >things using either of the custom ship design systems we have and no
> >combat system to make use of the data they present. This is assinine 
> and
> >a blatant waste of time and money.
> > I quit.
> >-- Jay Stranahan

> God knows I've been a fanatical player of Traveller and a supporter of 
> the new system, but responsibility IS required as well as ACTION. 
> As much as I deplore Jay's colorful language on this list, I can 
> understand and in many ways agree with him.  Though I don't regularly 
> contribute on the list, I read it daily, often deleting the subjects of 
> little or no interest to me or my gaming friends.  As Jay so 
> vociferously points out, there is much unnecessary tediousness to the 
> systems, especially where Traveller Architecture & Design are concerned.  
> Even though we as Traveller players are advocates of real science and 
> hard/sci-fi, we are first and foremost PLAYERS!

>     I don't know who is responsible for quality control of these 
> products.  Though Marc remains the driving force of the system, he may 
> be "too familiar" with the system, allowing jargon from Traveller 
> incarnations of the past to slip through.  I don't know what the 
> solution is, but certainly, it is NOT leaving the quality control and 
> thus the future of T4 with members of the TML (for similar reasons).
>    Though this may be shocking news to you, I think I can speak for a 
> majority of the casual Traveller players and fans (though I am quite 
> dedicated), as well as game store managers:
> 
>    Traveller, as it stands right now, is gravelly injured. 
> Get it in your minds, this is the reality out there.  Do you ever > wonder why CCGs, Star Wars RPG, and GURPS do so well?

Maybe because they are easy to pick up and start play right away ?
[Except for GURPS but that is a whole other question.] 

I work for a distributor and for a game store. I order games for a
living.  (Trust me, I'm a professional. :)  ).  I would love to order
more Traveller products but I can not.  I will not order what will not
sell.  Unless it gets better I cannot sell Traveller. Unless it gets
better I cannot recomend unqualifingly recommend Traveller.  _I_ will
buy Traveller and play Traveller until you know where freezes over - but
I don't know anyone else who will.

> Think about it.
> Traveller can only bank on its reputation for so long, and with the next 
> generation of Sci-Fi RPGs coming soon (Aeon, Babylon 5, Alternity)
> we better repair T4 now or it will never rise again.

In his letter about the future of TSR Peter Adkinson (President of WOTC)
says that Alternity is being held back until a 1998 release so that WOTC
can promote the heck out of it because "the days when a game can sell
without promotion are over" (paraphrased).

> This reincarnation of the rules, T4.1, MUST be done right, just like the 
> old GDW standards.  It must be LOGICAL, CLEAR (like close to errata free, hey if 
> T$R could do it...), and well- presented (well-placed charts, no 
> omissions, consistent terminology).
> 
> This is really your last chance with the non-TML gamers, if it isn't a 
> harbinger of a new attitude towards consistent rules/quality product, 
> your target audience (new gamers NOT the handful in TML) will go 
> away.... and so will T4.

> Perhaps we better start thinking about T5?

I am not cognicent of the chances of there being a T5.

All cynicism aside I am impressed by what I have seen of T4.1 and would
like to commend Marc for what he has done.  It would have been nice to
have seen it a bit earlier.

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 01:58:08 -0700 (PDT)
From: "John R. Snead" <jsnead@netcom.com>
Subject: FF&S2 Errata?

FF&S2 is a fine well laid-out product with a number of notable errors. Can
any of the authors or contributers on this list supply any errata for it? 

Many Thanks-


- -John Snead jsnead@netcom.com

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 04:10:17 -0500
From: Alex Ingram <ingram@airmail.net>
Subject: Re: T41 Skills Draft B Bureaucracy

Eris Reddoch wrote:
> 
> On 08/17/97 at 09:30 AM,  Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca> said:
> 
> >In my mind, Administration is the skill of actually knowing
> >rules & regs, and in completing paperwork quickly and correctly. Anyone
> >who has worked in an office knows this has little to do with how much
> >respect you get from superiors.
> 
> I agree with Richard.  I see Admin as knowing the rules, regs and the
> *shortcuts* to getting things done.  When Jo the Trader needs to get the
> paperwork completed and approved by 4 different offices before he can
> unload and transport his cargo to his buyer, he uses Admin.  When Hope the
> Naval Officer needs to get the Yardmaster to move her ship's repair to the
> top of the list and she does it by knowing the proper forms to fill out,
> exactly how to fill out those forms, who should get those forms, and how to
> get the forms to the top of that person's inbox, she uses Admin.
> 
> Admin doesn't make the character *look* competent in a bureaucracy...it
> let's the character *BE* competent in working inside a bureaucracy.
> 
This is the way I use Admin skill too. It's more akin to an
understanding of organizational behaviors and knowing the political
structure of the bureaucarcy in place and one ability to manipulate that
system to your advantage.

> BTW, I'm not gonna push for it's inclusion, but Scrounging is an important
> skill that isn't listed. It's not really Admin, nor Trade or Broker (the
> way they are defined), but characters are *always* Scrounging around for
> something or other.  ;->
> 
I hope that Marc reads this and considers putting it into the next
revision. Eris, help me flesh out the Procurement skill, it's still not
as strong as I would like it to be. Input anyone?


PROCUREMENT (or SUPPLY)

The average merc unit or starship has thousands or even tens of
thousands of systems, sub-systems, parts and expendable and
non-expendable supply items to keep track of and make purchase decisions
about. The universe if full of poor quality, counterfeit and flawed
items at every port of call awaiting the sucker in need. The Supply
Specialist (SS) keeps abreast of this massive supply maze. An SS using
their Procurement skill has a working knowledge of both Imperial and
non-imperial supply procedures and contracts and a network of personal
contacts (call the supply specialist club for a lack of better term-in
short networking).(Twenty years ago while in the Army I was assigned for
five months to a Quartermaster depot where bartering and part swopping
was the order of the day - ordering parts through the system was too
slow - these guys were master scroungers). By using this knowledge the
SS can obtain standard and non-standard needed items using published
computerized parts catalogues via the various military, governmental,
starport and corporate supply channels on most worlds. The higher the
Procurement skill level, the better one is at determining the
authenticity, quality level, availability and retail/street/discount
price of such items by examining and researching supply catalogues,
product evaluations and manufacture recall notices. Knowing the detail
here is the difference. The SS is also generally able to obtain a lower
price for almost anything through their special knowledge of
manufactures specials and rebates, personal bartering and special
incentives known only to supply insiders. 

This skill is also used to administer the unit/starship preventive
maintenance program. When a starship, vehicle or other item needs
scheduled maintenance or repairs the SS knows how to find a reputable
repair facility or mechanic, negotiate a fair price and monitor repair
progress. The SS also keep a complete inventory of all unit/ship
equipment with serial numbers for warranty and loss prevention. Some
bookkeeping and journal keeping is involved.

When a specific part or item is not available within regular supply
channels the SS resorts to using their sources within the gray or black
markets. By bartering and networking they can generally find the needed
item. The higher the skill level the faster and easier to find it, and
the less expensive it'll be. 

Of course this skill only applies at starports and worlds with a solid
economy supporting the tech level of the needed item. 


FINANCIAL

A character with this skill would have a knowledge of all aspects of
personal and business finance. They would have a understanding of
bookkeeping and accounting procedures and banking and investing
practices. This skill would improve ones chances of obtaining bank loans
or credit and facilitate the best interest rates, or having contacts
within the financial industry allowing one to find and acquire venture
or investment capital. It would assume a solid knowledge of different
types of financial instruments, the stock, bond and commodity markets
and general market economic conditions. Individuals with Financial skill
would also have a general understanding of insurance, real estate, tax
issues, trade tariffs, financial ethics, auditing, forecasting, estate
planning and governmental policies regarding financial markets. This
individual would also be able to recommend salary and wage packages,
employee benefit programs and handle payroll accounts for businesses.

Characters with this skill would know how to obtain credit reports,
banking records, land deeds, escrow accounts, probates/wills, trusts,
bankruptcy, insurance information and tax data. They would feel
conformable dealing with financial institutions such as banks, credit
unions, brokerage houses, insurance companies, tax offices, real estate
companies, credit bureaus and corporate financial departments. 


Alex Ingram
ingram@airmail.net

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 05:17:33 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: T41 Skills Draft A Academic

In a message dated 97-08-17 20:10:23 EDT, you write:

<< The current rules of an automatic skill gain each year, while simple,
conflict with requiring instruction to learn skills.  >>

Not precisely so. If it is a non-default skill, or one you already hold, then
the ONLY way to get that skill is through 

A. Education, or 
B. Instruction by someone who has the skill.

What you imply is that someone with Instruction would be a good teacher, and
that they could set up schools for PCs.

Marc

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 11:52:10 +0100
From: "Nick Munn" <N.S.Munn@sheffield.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Stutterwarp & Heisenberg

Garry Ward <Garry.E.Ward@worldnet.att.net>

> A magnetically confined plasma is a good analogy to what I view Jump effect
> to like. Electron tunnelling, however, is a particle effect, not an atom
> level effect. If you want to use a particle effect to move a ship, you would
> have to induce all of the particles to co ordinate the same effect in the
> same direction at the same time. Our old friend Heisenberg is back. I have
> not heard of proton, neutron or atom tunnelling.

FYI protons do indeed tunnel -- it's one of the quantum effects that 
makes hydrogen funny stuff (to use a technical term) -- but since 
they're, what, 1822 times massier than electrons they're sqrt(1822) 
times less good at it, crudely speaking.

You can get quantum tunneling of whole spaceships really easily, if 
you happen to have an infinite improbability drive fitted ;-)


Nick

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 22:36:42 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Re : Grav focussed lasers

In mail you write:

>>I would assume that if one can produce both local decreases and
>>increases in the gravitational field, it is possible to combine
>>devices which do this so as to create highly intense local fields
>>which don't obey an inverse square law.
>
> Couldn't grav-plates use gravitic dipoles? IIRC, dipole effects drop off as
> an inverse-cube,
> so an inertial compensator that uses a gravitic dipole could be strong
> enough to hold characters and cargo to the deckplates of a G-maneuvering
> ship without affecting the ship superstructure or objects outside the ship
> significantly.

There aren't any gravitic dipoles. And they are less likely than
magnetic monopoles.

However, the field generated by a flat plate is rather interesting.
Except near the edges, it is constant (no inverse square drop off). Of
course, any finite sized plate will have fairly severe edge effects so
that at a great distance, it appears to be a point source, and thus
follow inverse square.

Also, given how *close* you are to the "plate", the required "mass" is
quite low (I don't have the formula for the field of a flat plate
handy, or I'd give actual calculations). So the effects at a distance
are minimized.

For that matter, since we know that both attraction *and* repulsion are
possible with "grav tech", we can have 1/2 gee "pull" from the floor,
and another 1/2 gee "push" from the ceiling. Done properly, there isn't
any residual field outside the ship. It's also a lot safer, since if
one set of plates fails, you still have gravity!

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 22:19:09 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Flawed accumulator energy densities

In mail you write:

> Someone please check my work, I've been calculating the 
> energy density of capacitors that are available now.  By
> my calculations, the energy density of these devices are
> about par with TL18 Accumulators in FF&S2!  Here's how 
> I calculated the energy density:
>
>         capacitor:      100Farads @ 2.5V
>         package:        1.5cm diameter * 3.5cm long (cylindrical)
>
>         Energy:
>         Ecap = (C * V^2) / 2   
>                 [University Physics, Sixth Edition, pg.521, eq,27-8]
>
>         Ecap = (100F * 2.5^2) / 2 = 312.5J = .0003125MJ
>
>         Volume:
>         Vcap = pi*r^2*d
>
>         Vcap = (3.1415926 * 0.75cm^2 * 3.5cm) = 6.18cm^3 = .00000618m^3
>
>         Now to find the energy density (m^3/MJ):
>
>         Edensity = Vcap / Ecap = .00000618m^3 / .0003125MJ = 0.01979m^3/MJ
>
> A TL18 accumulator has an energy density of .02m^3/MJ, so that's what 
> SDI research was for!  Daniel Graham Sr's SDI program has jumped us from
> TL8 to TL18 in only 10-15 years!  Gee, let's see, that's (300yrs/TL at 
> ten TL's) 3000 years worth of advancement!!
>
> Hmm, this company is also planning on releasing the 5volt version shortly
> as well, in the same size package.  That's an energy density of 
> 0.005m^3/MJ, TL21!

Unfortunately, to use these as a power source, you have to be able to
use an output voltage noticeably lower than the max voltage of the
capacitor. And add circuitry to keep the discharge at the lower voltage
until the voltage in the cap drops below it.

For useful power units, you want this sort of capacitor, but with 100
or 1000 volt capability. Just pray that a bullet doesn't hit one of
them, as the energy release will be moderately explosive. :-)

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 22:45:24 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: FF&S2 - One more thing that's missing

In mail you write:

> Alternative technology has always held a sort of fascination for
> me - what would it be like if we had _that_ instead of _this_?
> What else would I have to change, and how would it be changed?
> Could the technologies coexist?  At what cost?  Why would one be
> better than the other, or why _wouldn't_ one be better than
> another.  FF&S1 didn't explore this deeply enough, but it _did_
> at least give jumping-off points.  FF&S2 doesn't.  I want the
> supplement.

We were told in no uncertain terms to *not* do alternate technologies
in FF&S2. In a way, its a good thing, as it gave us more time for what
did get in.

I think any such supplement will have to be non-IG.

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 12:10:06 +0100
From: "Nick Munn" <N.S.Munn@sheffield.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Spacefaring nations and economics

Tommy Grav <tommy.grav@astro.uio.no>:

> EU is today faced with a long line of problems as more and more right
> ekstrimist groups get power in their country (France for example),
> strenghtening the nationalistic movements. I have a strong feeling that
> the UK is going to withdraw from the European Union sometime in the
> beginning of the next century, as well as Sweden and Denmark.

I think if the UK reelects a Labour government in 2002 (probable date 
of next general election) then the UK will be sufficiently enmeshed 
in the EU by the time of the subsequent election (2007-ish) that it 
won't withdraw.  Denmark is notoriously unkeen on the EU but similar 
considerations may well apply.

> Egypt is never going to be a member of the EU, but the palistinian might
> if they are accepted into the Commonwealth. Isreal is also a much more
> natural candidate than Egypt, IMHO.

For space travel, sure.  For EU membership, I don't think so.


Nick

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 07:17:47 -0400
From: Kevin Combs <KCOMBS@mdems.ab.umd.edu>
Subject: Auction Update #17: RPG Items (AD&D, Space 1889, Traveller)

Rules:   Update 8/18/97  -  07:00 EDT         

Please check to see if you have won any items in this auction.

If so and you are not bidding on anything else, please
email me your smail address along with a list of the items
won and I can get a postage amount.

If so and you are still bidding on other items, please
continue and email the above info when the bidding stops.

1. Bids in US dollars. Minimum bid is listed. Bid in $.50 
increments for items under $10. $1.00 increments over $10.

2. Buyout offers will be considered.

3. Buyer pays shipping.

4. I prefer money orders, but I will take checks. I will 
hold items for one week so checks can clear my bank.  All 
checks must be drawn on a U.S. bank and in U.S. currency.

5. I reserve the right to pull any item for any reason. 

6. This auction will be updated every day.

7. The going x1, going x2, gone process will be used after
the first 10 days of the auction. Items will upgraded to 
the next level every two days when no bids are recieved.

8. Send all bids to kevin013@earthlink.net.

9. The following conditions will be used:   
    (MN) Item is perfect.
    (UP) Complete with the counters unpunched.
    (Ex) This item has been used/read, with minor marks.
    (PU) Complete with counters punched.  I do not know if 
         all counters are present.
    Some other comments regarding condition are noted as needed.  

Traveller Related Items
GDW     Fifth Frontier War (Box has some scuff    
        marks and is slightly pushed in)
        $55.00 rbeck@iquest.net (8/18) going x1
        $50.00 pnewman@alaska.net 
        $45.00 DMoody@bridge.com 

DGP     101 Vehicles                              
        $ 9.00 mark.samuels@questintl.com  gone

DGP     Referee's Gaming Kit                      
        Buyout - $12.00 - gone

DGP     Starship Operator's Manual                
        $16.00 gmgoffin@pacbell.net gone
        
GDW     Azhanti High Lightning (50% unpunched     
        does not have the tech manual or combat
        chart)
        Buyout - $40.00 - gone
        
Judge's 
Guild   Doom of the Singing Star                  MN  
        $ 6.50 efh@student.umass.edu - gone
                
Judge's 
Guild   Starships & Spacecraft                    MN  
        $ 5.50 efh@student.umass.edu gone

Martian 
Metals  15mm Traveller Figures (217 painted &     
        mounted 15mm Traveller figures.  Figure
        types includes Kree, Humanoid, Vargr, 
        Zhodani, Droyne, Robots and others.  Large  
        variety of posses, weapons, and clothing.  
        Also included is a 15mm 2-seat hovercraft 
        and 10 15mm Star Wars painted figures.  A
        total of 228 painted figures.)
        Buyout - $150.00 - gone!
        

AD&D Related Items                                Co     

TSR     Keep on the Borderlands                   Ex  
        $ 5.00 JaseHawkw@worldnet.att.net (8/14) going x1

TSR     Dragonlance Saga Book One                 Ex 
        $ 4.00 saveall@together.net (8/15) going x1

TSR     Art of the Dragonlance Saga               Ex  
        $11.00 stephan.Lange@iwf-mt.tu-berlin.de gone
        $10.00 BFireforge@aol.com

TSR     World of Krynn Trail Map                  
        $16.00 stephan.Lange@iwf-mt.tu-berlin.de gone
        $15.00 BFireforge@aol.com 

TSR     Al-Qadim Rulebook (slight cover tear)     Ex  
        $ 3.00 pblood@transbay.net gone
           
TSR     Atlas of the Dragonlance World            Ex
        $12.00 jhascher@gte.net gone
        
TSR     Castle Greyhawk                           
        $17.00 EugHarvey@aol.com gone
        $16.00 tarquin@ro.com 
        
TSR     DL 1 - Dragons of Despair                 Ex  $ 3.00
TSR     DL 2 - Dragons of Flame                   Ex  $ 3.00
TSR     DL 5 - Dragons of Mystery                 Ex  $ 3.00
TSR     DL 6 - Dragons of Ice                     Ex  $ 3.00
TSR     DL 7 - Dragons of Light                   Ex  $ 3.00
TSR     DL 8 - Dragons of War                     Ex  $ 3.00
TSR     DL 9 - Dragons of Deceit                  Ex  $ 3.00
TSR     DL10 - Dragons of Dreams                  Ex  $ 3.00

TSR     Dragonlance Classics Vol I                Ex  
        $ 8.00 lazascan@aol.com gone

TSR     Gnomes - 100, Dragons - 0                 Ex  $ 3.00
        $ 5.00 jhascher@gte.net gone
        $ 4.00 lazascan@aol.com 

TSR     Leaves from the Inn of the Last Home      Ex  $ 3.00


Space 1889 Related Items
GDW     Cloudships and Gunboats                   
        $ 4.50 pnewman@alaska.net (8/14) going x1
        $ 4.00 Thorinn3@aol.com 
        $ 3.00 jlong@wilmington.net 

GDW     Legions of Mars (21 - 25mm unpainted      
        figures)
        $17.00 rfields@actrix.gen.nz (8/14) going x1
        $15.00 DMoody@bridge.com 
        $12.00 rfields@actrix.gen.nz
        
GDW     Soldier's Companion                                  Ex
        $17.00 rbeck@iquest.net (8/15) going x1
        $15.00 DMoody@bridge.com 
        $11.00 Thorinn3@aol.com
        $10.00 egc@northnet.org 

GDW     Victorian Adventurers (10 - 25mm          
        unpainted figures)
        $20.00 ggm1201@dmacc.cc.ia.us (8/14) going x1
        $16.00 cgriffen@cisco.com 
        $16.00 rfields@actrix.gen.nz
                        
GDW     Sky Galleons of Mars (also includes a     
        copy of Cloudships & Gunboats)
        $20.00 DMoody@bridge.com    gone
        $17.00 pnewman@alaska.net
        $16.00 Thorinn3@aol.com 
        $15.00 terrell_scoggins@bigfoot.com 

GDW     Canal Priests of Mars                     
        $ 6.00 Thorinn3@aol.com gone
                
GDW     Caravans of Mars                          
        $ 5.50 gmgoffin@pacbell.net gone
                
GDW     Cloud Captains of Mars                    
        $ 7.00 terrell_scoggins@bigfoot.com gone
        $ 6.00 pnewman@alaska.net 
        
GDW     Conklin's Atlas of the World              
        $ 6.00 terrell_scoggins@bigfoot.com gone
                
GDW     Ironclads & Ether Flyers                  
        $ 8.00 terrell_scoggins@bigfoot.com gone
                
GDW     More Tales from the Ether                 
        $ 7.00 terrell_scoggins@bigfoot.com gone
        
GDW     Referee's Screen                          
        $ 4.00 pnewman@alaska.net gone
        $ 3.00 jlong@wilmington.net
        $ 3.00 pnewman@alaska.net

GDW     Space 1889 Rule Book (Hardback)           
        $ 8.00 terrell_scoggins@bigfoot.com gone
        $ 5.00 jlong@wilmington.net

GDW     Steppelords of Mars                       
        $ 4.00 pnewman@alaska.net gone
        $ 3.00 jlong@wilmington.net

GDW     Tales from the Ether (some cover marks)   
        $ 3.00 jlong@wilmington.net gone

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 16:45:36 +0800
From: Michael Bailey <mickb@opera.iinet.net.au>
Subject: TRTOOLS V0.94 finished!

Amazing how much you can get done when you decide to spend a weekend
staying out of the pub.

TRTOOLS version 0.94 is finished, a fair bit earlier than I anticipated.
New features in V0.94 are:

*	Stellar data conversion to more 'acceptable' data
*	Route mapping added to sector map display
*	subsector map displays now feature a UPP listing
*	Sector maps can now highlight selected trade codes

TRTOOLS can be found at:

http://www.iinet.net.au/~mickb/software.html

if you have trouble, or don't have WWW access, drop me a note and I'll send
you a copy.

As usual, bug reports, suggestions, comments and gripes are welcomed.
Michael T. Bailey (mickb@opera.iinet.net.au)

"You drive", he said, "I think there's something wrong with me"
			Hunter S. Thompson - 'Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas'

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1708
***********************************
Traveller-digest      Monday, August 18 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1709



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

evenet horizon
Re: ...artwork (was T4+)
Re: T41 Skills Draft C Chemistry
Re: T41 Skills Draft
Re: Question for Marc & a second question
How Big is Your Starport?
Re: Net Illiterate
Re: Femicide
Re: Flawed accumulator energy densities & superconductivity
UNESCO develops Jump Drive
Re: Bloodwell Incident.......and a few Questions
Skills
re: Urbanization
Urbanization
Re: Question for Marc & a second question
Re: ARRRRGGGHH!!! Mk. II

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 13:53:00 +0100 (BST)
From: "mark.wilkin" <aa4mwi@zen.sunderland.ac.uk>
Subject: evenet horizon

Errrrrr people could you not tell any of us non-american's any spoilers for 
this film I'm quite looking forward to seeing it when it gets over here.
thanks :-)

mark wilkin

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 09:13:11 -0400 (EDT)
From: SemoFetus@aol.com
Subject: Re: ...artwork (was T4+)

Eris said:
>> OTOH, I liked the LBB's and they had NO art at all.  

They had what every version of Traveller has been missing since...  The
little black books had _style_.  Unfortunately, IMHO, Traveller has been
plagued with mostly crappy artwork for a long time.

However, its not just the artwork I don't like with T4, its the design of the
books and the interior layouts.  

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 14:14:17 +0100
From: "Nick Munn" <N.S.Munn@sheffield.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: T41 Skills Draft C Chemistry

CardSharks@aol.com (Marc Miller) writes:

> 	Chemistry (Physical Sciences)	Edu, Int
> Chemistry skill involves knowledge of the science of inorganic and
> organic compounds. A character with Chemistry has a fundamental
> knowledge of the science of Chemistry, its basic principles, 
> relevant theories, and their application to life and career.

Important addition: Chemistry implies an understanding of materials,
their properties and their uses.

In practice, this will mean that Chemistry can be used to answer 
questions from "What material is this?" to "How can we synthesise 
this acid-resistanct polymer?" and "Is this chemical potentially
valuable?"

> 	Fundamental Knowledge. The basic knowledge of Chemistry is
> classroom taught.  The individual knows, or can find in references,
> basic information about chemical activity.

Addition: and can interpret that information appropriately.

> 	Qualitative Analysis. A person with Chemistry skill can apply
> that knowledge to the analysis of samples in order to determine 
> their general composition and its relevance to the current state
> of knowledge. The statement "This object is composed of matter our
> science has never seen" is the result of Qualitative Analysis.

Suggest rephrasing this to:

A person with Chemistry skill... [can discover] ... their general 
composition and novelty.  Unknown chemical compounds can be extremely 
valuable, as can new sources of known and patented pharmaceuticals.
The statement...

[end rephrase]

In all likelihood most molecules would be known to the science of a 
thriving Imperium, tho' gaps in the record might -- only might -- 
have developed.  Information on the chemical reactivity and uses of 
these molecules may be much patchier.

High tech chemistry is concerned with *arrangements* of 
molecules -- how to combine atoms into useful and interesting 
materials.  Some drugs are much more effective in one crystalline 
form than another; some crystals might be harder than diamond (for 
instance, theroretical studies show that a carbon/nitrogen crystal 
might be harder, if it could be made); "molecular computers" could 
use a series of thin molecular films in their components.  All these 
are current examples.

> 	To analyze (Qualitative Analysis Chemistry) something.
> 	(Edu + Chemistry) + Equipment < Easy (1D)
> 	Uncertain (.5D)
> 
> 	Typical Easy analysis involves knocking on a panel and asking
> "Is this steel? Aluminum? What?

Actually, I don't think that would be so easy to do.  Much easier to 
take chemical samples.

> A Ph. D in Chemistry (Edu A, Chemistry-6) would look at any of the
> previous tasks and know he would be successful barring only
> Spectacular Failure.

... and would then fail spectacularly ;-)
 
> 	To analyze (Qualitative Analysis Chemistry) something.
> 	(Edu + Chemistry) + Equipment < Formidable (3D)
> 	Uncertain (2D)
>
> The result is a qualitative analysis of the sample, indicating the
> materials which compose it and a knowledge of its general properties.

Qualitative analysis implies discovering constituents but not 
proportions.  So fibreglass is shown to be a resin plus glass 
stiffening, for instance.

> 	Quantitative Analysis. A person with Chemistry skill can apply that
> knowledge to the analysis of samples in order to determine their specific
> composition. Before a quantitative analysis can be made, the chemist
> must be successful in a qualitative analysis.

Note: it is much easier to analyse the chemical composition of a 
material than its structure, especially with modern lab equipment.  
This is particularly true in the case of something like modern 
semiconductor devices (transistors, chips etc.).

Note that at TL9+ analysis of chemical composition will be almost 
trivial and could be automated to a huge extent.


> 	Chemical Engineering. Given a knowledge of the composition through
> Quantitative Analysis, a chemist can create a process which will
> reproduce the material.

Substitute "can devise" for "can create" a process.  It may be that 
the process requires apparatus not available, such as the gravitic 
generators used to create superdense materials.

> 	Unlike analysis, which depends on Education, Chemical Engineering tasks
> depend on Intelligence.

Many processes will be known, and "creating" them will be a Task 
using Research and Edu.

To devise and implement a novel process is a Task on Chemistry and 
Int.  I would recommend the design and implementation being separate 
tasks.


> 	To create a process (Chemical Engineering)
> 	(Int + Chemistry) + Equipment < Formidable (4D)
> 	Uncertain (3D). Accurate quantitative analysis results are required for
> success.

> BioChemistry. While Chemistry involves some knowledge of organic
> compounds, it does not encompass Biology. An individual with skill
> level 4+ in both Chemistry and Biology is a BioChemist.

Similarly, while Chemistry relies upon physical principles it implies 
only a basic familiarity with Physics.  Individuals with Physics-4 
and Chemistry-4 are Chemical Physicists or Molecular Physicists.


> Chemical Equipment. All chemical tests with a difficulty greater 
> than Easy require some lab equipment; without lab equipment, tests
> cannot be made.
> 	+1	Test Kit.
> 	+2	Portable Lab Pack. Typical University Student Lab.
> 	+3	Field Lab.
> 	+4	Shipboard Lab.
> 	+5	Typical University Research Lab.
> 	+6	Major Commercial Lab.

Most qualitative analyses will require a field lab or better to run.


Nick

formerly University of Cambridge, Dept. of Chemistry
and now working in chemical information systems

Dr. Nick Munn, Dept. of Information Studies, University of Sheffield
Tel. (0)114 222 2673, email n.s.munn@sheffield.ac.uk

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 10:26:28 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: T41 Skills Draft

In a message dated 97-08-18 03:50:48 EDT, you write:

<< 
 If skill levels are supposed to represent roughly 1 year of experience in a
 skill, then I would think a graduate student in chemistry would have
 considerably more than a skill of 2. Sure, a grad student who spent time
 studying Research, Carousing, or Instruction instead of his or her major
 may have low skill levels, but I think a typical grad student would have a
 skill level of 4 or 5 in his or her major.
  >>
A grad student requires Subject-3 to get a degree; a Ph.D requires Subject-6
to get a degree (according to the rules). A specific student may have more
than these levels, but this is the requirement for a degree. So a new grad
student (and a not very good one at that) probably has Subject-2 (Edu-7
reflects his BA).

Marc

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 10:25:58 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Question for Marc & a second question

In a message dated 97-08-18 03:49:24 EDT, you write:

<< Real power gamers will all have skills of 1... and
 characteristics of 15. Easy to get, if you let them roll on the physical
 and mental development tables whenever they want. >>

So a character rolls real dice and gets good rolls... so starts out with
AAA999. Just rolling on the physical and mental tables to move this to FFFFF9
(assuming all possible die rolls go right) makes the character 40 years old
with practically no skills.

Or rolls all evening long until he rolls CCCCCC, and then spends 15 years of
character generation to make the fellow FFFFFC. Or even FFFFFF assuming he
went Noble. And has virtually no skills (they all came as physical plusses).

>>I do not have the T4.1 chargen rules. Do they address this problem?<<

Yes they do. They tell how to roll dice and generate characters. The problem
of players generating an FFFFFF is addressed by the real world laws of
probability. For a player to generate a character who begins with AAAAAA or
better is less than 0.002% (maybe 1 in 3 billion). For the other 2 billion
tries players make, the characters are balanced.

Marc

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

Date: 18 Aug 1997 10:15 EDT
From: "Robert Eaglestone" <eaglesto@nortel.ca>
Subject: How Big is Your Starport?

Hello all,

When I posted house rules re: starport 'size', someone 
(perhaps jokingly) wondered about the actual tonnage
or acreage of a starport.  So I started wondering too,
and scribbled up a draft house rule... so without further
ado, here I go again.

1. Calculate Size Index
- -----------------------
Starport size = floor (The number of populated worlds within 2 parsecs / 3) 
              + (Starport class: A=2, B=1, C=0, D=-1, E=-2) 
              + floor (Tech Level / 4) 
              + 2 if there is a Naval base
              + 1 if on an XBoat route

OR

              Value of starports on worlds within 2 parsecs
                (Starport class: Interdicted=0, Non-Imperial client=1, 
                     A=2, B=1.5, C=1, D=0.5, E=0.25, X=0)
              + 2 if naval base
              + 1 if on an XBoat route

2. Determine Starport Capabilities
- ----------------------------------
Size	Orbital	Passenger	Freight		Fuel	Shuttles
Index	Ports	Facilities	Handling		
- ----------------------------------------------------------------
0	0	0		0		0	 0
1	0	10		0		1t	 0
2	0	20		10t		5t	 0
3	0	30		50t		25t	 0
4	1	88		250t		125t	 0
5	4	50		1250t	        625t	 2
6	16	192		6250t		3125t	 8
7	64	326		31,250t		15,625t  32
8	256	1104		156,250t	78,125t  128
9	1024	4186		781,250t	390,625t 512
A	4096	16484		3.9Mt		1.95Mt	 2048

Okay then, orbital ports determines base orbital tonnage.
Let's multiply the number of orbital ports x 100 to get
the tons displacement.  So 4000 ports = 400,000 tons.  Sound okay?


Surface hectarage = func(passenger, freight, fuel);
	= 1
	+ sqrt(fuel storage)
	+ sqrt(freight)
	+ passenger / 1000

How's that for starters?

How should world populations factor in?

Rob

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

Date: 18 Aug 1997 15:07:44 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: Net Illiterate

WHUFFO is 'Ebonics' (1) not netspeak.

Whuffo (also written "wuhffo" and "wuhfo") literally means "what for". It
translates as "why did", "why do", "why does" or other variations depending
on context.  (Tenses in Ebonics appear to be optional.)  "Whuffo yo do that?"
translates as "Why did you that?" or "Why are you doing that?" depending on
context.


Note: not to be confused with "muhfo", which literally means someone who has
intercourse with their maternal parent, but in context can be either an
insult, a simple noun (roughly equivalent to "guy"), or a complement.


Notice the absence of smilies.  I wish I was making this up as a joke, but
I'm not.  Students actually earn high school credits by learning this stuff.



(1) "Ebonics" - ie. Black English - has been officially recognized as a
second language, as opposed to a dialect of English, in some parts of the
USA.  

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

Date: 18 Aug 1997 15:13:52 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: Femicide

>Also, this is a deeply engrained human behavior, dowries or their
>equivalent, persist in nearly all culture to this day. Why do you think
>it's traditional for the _brides_ family to pay for the (often lavish)
>wedding?
>
>Bruce Johnson


In the Phillipines (or at least the part my ex-fiancee came from) the groom
paid for the wedding, as well as made gifts to the bride's father.  The
sociology texts I consulted (when I was balking at the cost) described this
as a way of showing that the groom could afford a wife.  Made sense when you
were providing a pig for the local villagers, but gets a bit more expensive
when they move to the city and _still_ want everyone invited!  Picture an
extravagent Italian wedding, where the bride's parents choose everything and
the groom pays :-(  

This attitude is _not_ universal in the Phillipines; it is common in rural
Luzon but virtually ignored in Manilla (which is very Westernized) except
among new arrivals from the country.

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 16:14:40 +0100
From: John_Wood@cbtsys.com
Subject: Re: Flawed accumulator energy densities & superconductivity

I haven't had a chance to get my hands on FF&S2 yet, so I can't contribute
to this particular thread directly, however I do have  a related question.
     Can anyone tell me what the impact of room temperature superconducting
materials will be on the Traveller universe. I'm not sure if these are part
of the official background or not, but if they are they seem pretty
invisible outside of Mag Lev applications. I've been reading Larry Niven's
Ringworld Throne and superconducting material makes an appearance as a
cloth and (i assume) a long-life power storage mechanism.
     In traveller terms how would RTemp superconductors affect power
storage? Would they be a good or better substitute for homopolar generators
(flywheels) in weapon systems, for instance? And how would they perform as
an armour coating?
     I'd be interested to hear whatever superconductor-related opinions
anyone can throw my way.

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 11:53:46 -0400
From: "Glenn Crawford" <glennc@nelvana.com>
Subject: UNESCO develops Jump Drive

Someone said (I get the digest, and I forgot to copy it):
UNESCO develops Jump Drive

WHAT!?!
UNESCO!?!
This hopelessly corrupt organization couldn't develop an ulcer in a CEO. The
spent all their money developing training programs for revolutions in the
third world.  

The whole UN is a joke (with the possible exception of the WHO*), the future
would be smaller orgs, like the EU, ASEAN, NATO, NAFTA, even the OAU

* World Health Organization, not the band**

** The band being defined as the Who, not the band known as The Band

The Band on stage, is Who?
Yes
The band is called Yes?
No, they aren't even here
Who is?
Yes, they are one of the headliners
Who?
Yes
And they are on stage?
Yes
So they're Yes
No, they're Who
That's what I am asking you

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 17:02:37 +0100
From: "J." <Jonathan@hccm.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Bloodwell Incident.......and a few Questions

>> > A question for all you CT crinklies! ;-)
>> > Was the Bloodwell incident ever written up beyond the quote below?
>> I believe some of the TAS news from early issues of the Journal had some
>> more details: check the complete archives on the IG web site.
>F.Y.I.
>There was another 1000-ton merchie blown to vapors by the ImpNavy on
>022-1098. A Levianthan-class was destroyed off Zaibon in the Lunion
>subsector by a Kokirrak-class dreadnought (ouch!) due to a 
>"communications failure". Only 15 crew (out of 56, not counting
>passengers) survived.

I found the TNS article, here's what it says:
Dentus/Regina (0601-C979500-A S) Date: 361-1105 
Word was recieved today that two weeks ago the Imperial Battle cruiser Adamdun 
mistakenly engaged and destroyed the merchant craft Bloodwell of the Oberlindes 
Line. The Bloodwell, according to the crew of the battle cruiser, was not 
showing its ID transponder signal and would not answer broad-beam hails. The 
Bloodwell was under full acceleration, and after it refused to change vector 
in response to laser warning fire, it was engaged engaged by high-G missile 
fire and destroyed. A subsequent (and unsuccessful) search for survivors 
resulted in the identification of the ship.

Oberlindes Lines officials called the story "an obvious cover-up of a tragic 
display of incompetence." and claimed that the Bloodwell's ID transponder had 
just undergone its annual maintenance check, and could not have failed to 
function. As in all commercial vessels, the ID transponder was supposedly 
tamper-proof, and are could not have been turned off by the crew. Legal action 
is expected.

While I'm here, a few more questions from the CT era:

1) Why is Ruie not part of the imperium?

2) What is the reason for Roup's Amber Classification?

3) What is the reason for Pscias' Red Classification?

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 12:30:45 -0400
From: "Glenn Crawford" <glennc@nelvana.com>
Subject: Skills

Jack-O-T idea
 Example (based on idea of Ship's Watch skill)
Ship Ops (Atmospheric)  combines pilot, and part of navigation + close
maneuvering
Ship Ops (Space) combines pilot and navigation + sensors
Ship Ops (Gas Giant) combines pilot, and part of navigation + sensors
These could be available to Navy characters. They give all skills covered
but are treated as 0.5 if needed in a specific task. ie. Ship Ops (space) 5
would be Pilot 2, nav 2, sensors 2, whereas a trained pilot (skill 3) is
marginally better on one function. But they are full in one area. A combat
pilot gets pilot, heavy weapons and sensors but doesn't get the full bonus
unless he is in combat. a regular pilot flying a plane thru a storm is
better than the combat is

Make Jack-o-T recipients pick a cluster of skills (related) give it a name
and they get the bonus in those areas, or 0.5 in the three related skills

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 12:40:54 -0400
From: "Glenn Crawford" <glennc@nelvana.com>
Subject: re: Urbanization

Whoops, FTFS

(forgot the friggin' smiley)

(  8^[P*

(self-portrait)

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 12:36:43 -0400
From: "Glenn Crawford" <glennc@nelvana.com>
Subject: Urbanization

Australia is also the world's most urbanised nation, with almost 92% of the
population living in urban areas.

Bzzzt. incorrect.

The answer is Singapore at 100%

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 12:52:11 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Question for Marc & a second question

In a message dated 97-08-18 08:25:44 EDT, you write:

<< 
 Personally, I'd rather characteristic advances be made *very* expensive,
 let the player advance a characteristic OR roll for the 4 skills he gets
 during the term.  Then if you've *just*got*to*have* that STR+1 then you can
 get it, but it's gonna cost you!
 
  >>

This is the typical Table 1 from T41 chargen. As you can see, picking this
table makes you a jock.

	1. Physical	
		1	+1 Strength
		2	+1 Dexterity	
		3	+1 Endurance	
		4	Athletics	
		5	Fighting	
		6	Forward Observer	

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 09:42:56 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: ARRRRGGGHH!!! Mk. II

At 05:28 PM 8/17/97 -0700, you wrote:
>>FFS2 was stated to be the no-math-barred gearhead design system.  A
>>developer's tool as it were.  It was never, ever, pitched or talked
>>about as anything else (here or on the beta list).
>
>A high-complexity developer's tool without a system to use it. This is
>so manifestly pointless as to be frightening.

Fine.  You write it.  Unless you haven't figured it out, the people who
wrote FFS2 (many of whom you are insulting repeatedly) were told NOT to
design a combat system.  There were given an ASSIGNMENT, and not much time
to do it.  Several people have said that they were told that the combat
system would be ready before the deadline.  Guess what? It didn't happen,
and the FFS2 deadline rolled around, so they had to do the best that they
could with what they had.  As far as I'm concerned, the authors of FFS2
have done an excellent job.

>>SSDS and QSDS were made with FFS (with modifications), period.  It
>>sounds like if either of these systems had more plug-ins your
>>complaints wouldn't exist.  Given that a "secret" fixed FFS version
>>is the basis of the later, easy to use design systems, it makes
>>sense to print the damn thing so that others with the desire can
>>make more plug-ins.
>
>God damn it, you seem to think that I'm just whining about the
>complexity level -- as though I had a nice safe user-friendly
>alternative. The FACT is that if I want to design a fighter craft
>(nothing esoteric, like battle armor or blimps or even combat choppers),
>or a dreadnaught, or anything over 5000 tons and not of TL10-12 that I
>am pretty much WITHOUT options. 

I think you are whining that Traveller isn't custom designed just for you.
FFS2 has been out for two weeks.  It hasn't made it to many parts of the
country yet due to the UPS strike.  GIVE US A CHANCE TO WORK OUT SOME
PACKAGES!  You seem to expect that we'll hand-deliver what you want right
now, with a big cheery smile on our faces while you call us names.  Grow up.

>Look... for all my Irish temperament, I'm actually a pretty easy guy to
>satisfy. Just please in the name of God tell me how to build a cute
>widdle space fighter for T4 without a scientific calculator... then a
>20,000 ton carrier to wrap around several squadrons of them... nothing
>esoteric, like hot-air balloons or Bussard ramjets....

You have three choices.  Either breakdown and spend $25 on a scientific
calculator, get one of the many spreadsheets avalible, or wait for those
folks who do QSDS packages to get around to it.  I'm sorry that I haven't
devoted 24 hour days to fulfiling you whims, but my doctor seems to think
that HD treatment is more important.  I imagine that the other gearheads
have similar real life concerns.

>>FFS2 was made from the ground up as what it was, the underlying
>>system for designing stuff.  Real units were used wherever possible
>>so that regardless of what combat system that gets used, they can
>>all convert from a set of units that doesn't end up being "hit
>>points" or some such crap.  There would have been a final stat
>>within a design sequence had the combat system (*any* combat system)
>>existed.
>
>Oh. Ah. I see. It's all IG's fault for not keeping up with the authors,
>who continue to charge innovatively ahead and design ever-more complex,
>evermore incompatible design systems for a game that cannot make use of
>what they generate.

*If* IG had provided the FFS2 design team with the space combat system, I
imagine that the book would have been different.  Of course, you can use
ships built with FFS2 with BL, RPSC, or any other Traveller combat system
because everything is in real world units.

>>> Since what we have is simply recycled TNE -- at the militant insistance
>>> of the gearheads on this digest, mind you -- and since IG is now going
>>> to have to resurrect some God-awfully complex space combat system to
>>> conform to it, and since TNE was stillborn on the market as soon as it
>
>>BS.  There is no requirement for a complex combat system at all.
>>The idea was that the underlying techy rules should be made
>>available to people that wanted to make plug-ns for the other system
>>that were consistant.  If you don't want to do the math, wait for
>>plug-ins---the plug-in developers now have the tools to make them
>>for you, sheesh.
>
>Oh, okay. I should just shut up and quit bitching and crawl back under
>my rock and design pieces of hardware that I can only create with
>somebody else's custom-written spreadsheets downloaded off the Internet
>that generate statistics like G-hours and microseconds that I have no
>way of converting to QSDS stats, unless by the grace of God the guy that
>wrote the spreadsheet includes a little column at the bottom that does
>it for me. And toss my $100 worth of books, which I might not even have
>bothered buying, seeing that not one of them agrees with the other. 

Now you are getting pedantic.  You have made your point.  If you want to go
away, please go away.   Like I have said, Leonard has said, and several
others have said: give us a little time to start producing QSDS plug ins!
We have to *write* and *test* these things (you know, that work you expect
others to do for you) before we post them so that you won't be back in six
weeks screaming that the design is broken because Doug's laser turret
states xxx, whereas on Joe's website it says yyy.

But here, for you gaming pleasure, I present The Doug Berry Space Combat
System.

Each side rolls one die.  Add Pilot, Ship Tactics, and Gunnery Skill for
each ship.  Add total number of lasers.  High roll wins.

Feel free to modify the DBSCS(c) as needed to cover changing tactical
situations.

Is that simple enough?

>In brief, I should simply have taken up checkers for a year and a half,
>waited for FF&S2 to come out, then bum a spreadsheet for it off
>somebody. Groovy. NOW you tell me.

No, we told you six months ago.  Have you just *now* figured out that IG's
schedule is two parts fantasy and one part wistful thinking?  Did you
somehow miss every reference to FFS2 as a gearhead book?

>>These hated gearheads you talk about did the damn thing with no
>>chance to really put it together they way they might have liked,
>>and it would have been _really_ nice if any of us had had the
>>slightest idea what the combat systems would be like in advance
>>(note that the T4 combat system was _supposed_ to look like HG, and so
>>QSDS was designed to produce numbers that would work in this
>>system---then we get the combat system that isn't in the same
>>ballpark *sigh*.
>
>Understatement of the year.... but it still doesn't explain the
>incompatible-with-anything VDS. Nor the different language, stats, etc.
>between SSDS and QSDS. Nor a new FF&S that is slightly off-kilter with
>the old, which means that even if somebody had the out-of-print book to
>make their own plugins that they will now have to revamp EVERY FRIGGING
>THING THEY'VE BUILT to conform to the new standard.

When you see the August THUDDD, take a look at the ships designed.  They
all us the common T4 ship description.  They were alldesigned using
different sequences.  In reviewing my Terrapin, I find that the basic
design is still sound under FFS2.  The only change needed was to adjust the
sensor description.

>>You have been flamed, true.  It is because you chose this product as
>>the focus of your rant.  It is actually what it claims to be,
>>with a some errata, but pretty good.  The lack of a combat system to
>>*use* it with, is a major flaw.  
>
>ANY BOOK FOR DESIGNING HARDWARE THAT HAS NO SYSTEM FOR USING IT IS A
>WASTE OF TIME AND MONEY, and only a techno-game-geek locked into their
>own private litle introverted universe could possibly fail to understand
>(and hence be offended by) this. Nevermind the complexity level -- let's
>just set the whole issue of real-world complexity for real-world users
>off on the side for a minute. As is, FF&S2 is a $25 paperweight, because
>YOU CANNOT F*CKING USE WHAT YOU F*CKING BUILD. Why is that hard for
>people to grasp?

I've used a battlefield missile designed using the new FFS2 two nights ago.  

I have tried to keep my temper, but you are pushing me.  I will make this
very damn clear.  I do not appreciate you calling me, my friends, or any of
the people who worked on FFS2 names of any sort.  That is immature and
uncalled for.  You dodn't like the book?  Tough.  Perhaps you shhould have
looked at it before you bought it.  This is why I don't own a copy of
Starships or Anomiles.. I looked first.  If you haven't learned that first
lesson of consumerism, then too bad for you.

You seem to have a problem with anybody who enjoys design work.  Guess
what?  We are the ones who are shaping the game simply because we are the
ones who are bothering too.  You want to make a mark?  Sit down and write
something.  But be prepared to have your work and yor person attacked by
people for any number of reasons.

>It would be -- not OK, but more palatable -- if there were alternatives.
>What is common fare in any SF game? Space fighters? Space fighters are
>cool. Robots? Hovertanks? Dreadnaughts? Powered battle armor? Okay;
>let's keep it simple; let's stop right there.We can't let everybody have
>everything they want. Let's confine ourselves to the basics.

CSC has about half the things listed right there.

>Where are my stock dreadnaughts and space fighters and robots and
>things? Can I, after 1 year and $120, even HAVE these staples in my
>campaign unless I buy FF&S2 and whip them up myself out of whole cloth?
>No. Do I have a rules set that tells me what happens when all the
>warbots and hovertanks and star cruisers all start shooting at each
>other? No. Can I design stuff using FF&S2 that will be compatible with
>the (old-FF&S-based) QSDS and SSDS-constructed ships (assuming I've
>found and downloaded the un-broken version of QSDS off the Net), as well
>as (virtually non-existant) stock ship & vehicle designs? No.

You want a dradnought?  Here:

Marvin class dreadnought.

Size: REAL Big
Guns: Lots
Armor: Thick
Apperance: Big Shiny wedge

Anything more will require that somebody sit down and hack out the numbers.
 The whole point of FFS2 is to allow those of us who enjoy doing this the
chance to develop starships and the like.  This means that rather than a
stock Battleship, you be able to choose one you like, and the'll have some
flavor to them.

I'm currently noodling around with the _Royal_ class Battleship, a 90kton
TL12 ship that fulfils the role of ship of the line for the new Imperium.
When it is done, I will post it to the list.  You will then have Traveller
stats for a Dreadnaught.  I will have done all the work.  What do I get?
Nada. Zip.  

I may even do some weapon packages for QSDS (I'm back on disability, and
have a great deal of time on my hands.)

>Perhaps it makes you happy to have your complex little design system
>with which you can fine-tune ships and vehicles and ordnance that sit
>there and look pretty and do nothing, but not me -- oh! I forgot! You've
>GOT the old TNE books! More importantly, you can UNDERSTAND them! You
>can USE what you build! 

The only TNE book is still own is the Regency Sourcebook.  Care to stop
jumping to conclusions?

>>The fact that SSDS and QSDS were
>>built with FFS, and not FFS2 is another problem. 
>
>Oh, REALLY? So we are going to have to revamp all our existing designs
>YET AGAIN to conform with YET ANOTHER rules set, even if we were
>faithful to the original FF&S? Of course, that actually shouldn't be too
>much trouble for IG, since most if not all of the stock designs in
>Starships were made up out of thin air anyway.... but what about all
>those ships built using QSDS and SSDS in the intervening time (they are
>mutually incompatible, remember -- not in theory, but in fact.) I guess
>now we need QSDS 2 and SSDS 2, to conform to FF&S2!!!

The systems are pretty compatible.  Sensors and fusion+ will be the only
sticking points, IIRC.

>>It should have been FFS2 (even if unprinted first), then QSDS, along
>>with a combat system to use it (which should've been in beta when
>>FFS2 was being worked on).
>
>Holy shit and tomato juice. You are seriously telling me that you come
>out with the high-complexity design system FIRST, then the SIMPLE
>version for all the kiddies, THEN the combat system to make use of what
>you build and all the stock designs that should have been included in
>the original release? (What good is an SF game without spaceships? or a
>rules set so they can shoot at each other)?

Yeah, and they should have done Windows before DOS...  Please read
carefully: QSDS is a simple system using PREBUILT MODULES to allow for
quick, simple starship contruction.  Thos modiules were built using FFS.
So it stands to reason that FFS had to come first.

<snip bit on farming out writing to the fans>

I don't know about any of the others who are writing, but I'm in it because
I like it.

<snip>

>Between stock starship designs that are simply made up and cannot be
>built with anything, and the above design issues, and the fact that the
>NEW master design system is apparently a little-bit incompatible with
>the old out-of-print semi-comprehensible one... I don't know whether to
>laugh or cry. I simply cannot believe that people are happily defending
>this. I feel like I'm trying to describe color to a blind man. The more
>I point out that things are non-functional, the more people insist that
>it is (1) actually okay and will all be resolved in the next book, or
>(2) IG's fault. 

So you you dislike designs that are hand waved out of thin air?  Then why
do you bitch so mightily about the attempt to make a solid design system?

Perhaps you should sell FFS2 back to your gamestore, it doesn't seem to be
for you.

>Oh well. Maybe somebody will take pity on this poor sinner and design an
>Excel spreadsheet to design capital fire-&-forget missiles, along with
>stats for the launcher and a column for conversion to QSDS stats... a
>VLS that shoots Sidewinders the size of a telephone pole.... and then a
>nice 20-ton fighter that can carry a pair on external racks...

What TL and when do you need them by?

>Until then, I STILL quit. This broken, self-contradicting, Swiss-cheese
>excuse for an overpriced puke-ola game system will claim not one jot
>more of my time or money. This whole f*ckaround has reached such heights
>of baroque unreality that it defies description. Not only is the Emperor
>naked, but he's dead -- and instead of trying to revive the sonofabitch,
>or anoint a worthy successor (T5?), the game-nerds are dutifully
>genuflecting to the decomposing corpse.

Jay, if you are going to quit, please do so.  Otherwise, stop this abusive
behavoir and let us gearheads do what we do best, and get you your damn
QSDS modules.
- --
+------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry         dberry@hooked.net   |
| Gearhead & Planetologist, Traveller since 1977 |
|     Inquistor Magnus, Royal Commission for     |
|               Canon Correctness                |
|         http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|************************************************|
| "I believe in my heart that all astromoners    |
|  should be forced to go outside on summer      |
|  nights, just to admire the sky."  -Carl Sagan |
+------------------------------------------------+

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1709
***********************************
Traveller-digest      Monday, August 18 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1710



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Bloodwell Incident.......and a few Questions
Re: ARRRRGGGHH!!! Mk. II
alternate tech discussion
Re: ...artwork (was T4+)
Re: UNESCO develops Jump Drive
Re: T4+ 
Slow grav vehicles
New ships on my web page
Eurocentrism (and Americocentrism)
Fighters, fatigue, bathrooms, and zero-G beds
Re: ARRRRGGGHH!!! Mk. II
Re: How Big is Your Starport?
Task Chapter: Comments, Observations, Questions

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 09:56:44 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Bloodwell Incident.......and a few Questions

At 05:02 PM 8/18/97 +0100, you wrote:

>While I'm here, a few more questions from the CT era:
>
>1) Why is Ruie not part of the imperium?

The balkanized world couldn't get a majority of its population to agree to
membership.  A great deal of intrigue onthat little world.

>2) What is the reason for Roup's Amber Classification?

Pop A, Hyd A, TL7.  This is a world that will be like a overcrowded rat box.

Note: these are from memory, and may reflect campaigns that I played in
long ago rather than a printed source.
- --
+------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry         dberry@hooked.net   |
| Gearhead & Planetologist, Traveller since 1977 |
|     Inquistor Magnus, Royal Commission for     |
|               Canon Correctness                |
|         http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|************************************************|
| "I believe in my heart that all astromoners    |
|  should be forced to go outside on summer      |
|  nights, just to admire the sky."  -Carl Sagan |
+------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 13:06:56 -0400
From: Thomas Walter Trelenberg <tomt@scri.fsu.edu>
Subject: Re: ARRRRGGGHH!!! Mk. II

************************************
Until then, I STILL quit. This broken, self-contradicting, Swiss-cheese
excuse for an overpriced puke-ola game system will claim not one jot
more of my time or money. This whole f*ckaround has reached such heights
of baroque unreality that it defies description. Not only is the Emperor
naked, but he's dead -- and instead of trying to revive the sonofabitch,
or anoint a worthy successor (T5?), the game-nerds are dutifully
genuflecting to the decomposing corpse.

- - -- Jay Stranahan
  
************************************

Jay,

I think that it really might be a good idea for you to follow your own
advice. ARRRRGGGHH!!! Mk. II  The game is supposed to be fun...but it
seems that it has no longer become that for you.  If your blood pressure
is really running as high as it appears to be in your posts, then
continuing with T4 is going to drive you to an early grave.  There's
plenty of CT/MT/TNE stuff out there to keep a ref. with a little
imagination going for a long time.

Secondly, I would just like to state that, while I'm sure you think that
adding expletives to your posts really drives home your point...I for
one do not appreciate them.  Thats just my opinion and I will attempt to
avoid reading your posts in the future to avoid them...which is sad
because I like to hear everyones opinions.  However for me your language
is not only offensive...but also tends to have me give less credence to
your opinions than I otherwise might...then again your writing style is
your choice.

Anyway, find some rule you like and have fun.  I doubt very much that
Marc intended the revised Traveller to cause anyone to have a heart
attack and all the anger and cursing in the world is not going to turn
back the clock a year and produce the product you want.

TT

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 13:20:07 -0400
From: Thomas Walter Trelenberg <tomt@scri.fsu.edu>
Subject: alternate tech discussion

***********************************
Jeff, I'm with you on this one!  I *use* alternative technology in my
games...a LOT of alternative technology. ;->  

I don't think TML is the place to develop Stutterwarps and Stutterjumps,
Psionic Drives, Hyper Drives, Dean Drives, Ether Propellers, Exotic Matter
Drives, Casimir Powercells, M/AM power plants, CNO fusion, Blasters, Neural
Whips, Grav Scanners (I don't think they are in FFS2 are they?), and all
manner of other SF technology. Can you imagine the noise to signal
ration?
;->  

I *hope* GDW-Beta becomes a *hotbed* of alternative technology development
during the next few months...how about it Guy?  If not there, maybe MPGN
would create another list for us here.  I *would* have suggested ISBA, as
an alternative site, but they are more focused on using what we already
have rather than developing new technology.

Eris
***********************************

Eris,

A request.......I push my time limit envelope as it is with reading all
the TMLs (not whining, just the truth....and actually prefer it to the
alternative of having so little to do that I am bored out of my skull)
and will not have the time to subscrive to yet another list (in this
case GDW-beta).  If this alternate tech disscussion occures on GDW-beta
could you let those of us on TML who are interested that it has started
(I would subscribe for a little while) or at least post a summary to the
TML once the discussion is complete.  I think it would be terribly
interesting and useful for supplying a more "alien" feel to some planets

Thanks

TT

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 13:41:41 -0400
From: Thomas Walter Trelenberg <tomt@scri.fsu.edu>
Subject: Re: ...artwork (was T4+)

**************************
OTOH, I liked the LBB's and they had NO art at all.  

Eris
**************************

Oh come on Eris.....Don't you remember "Jameson"  in LBB#1?  :-}

TT

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 97 12:36:16 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: UNESCO develops Jump Drive

On 08/18/97 at 11:53 AM,  "Glenn Crawford" <glennc@nelvana.com> said:


>Someone said (I get the digest, and I forgot to copy it):
>UNESCO develops Jump Drive

>WHAT!?!
>UNESCO!?!

Who?

>This hopelessly corrupt organization couldn't develop an ulcer in a CEO.
>The spent all their money developing training programs for revolutions in
>the third world.  

Yes!

>The whole UN is a joke (with the possible exception of the WHO*), the
>future would be smaller orgs, like the EU, ASEAN, NATO, NAFTA, even the
>OAU

Yes, again!

I would prefer if it was Grass Roots, but that's not likely.

>* World Health Organization, not the band**

The Band?  

>** The band being defined as the Who, not the band known as The Band

Oh..Yes!

>The Band on stage, is Who?
>Yes
>The band is called Yes?
>No, they aren't even here
>Who is?
>Yes, they are one of the headliners
>Who?
>Yes
>And they are on stage?
>Yes
>So they're Yes
>No, they're Who
>That's what I am asking you

Excellent!  You should write for Abbot and Costello. What do you mean they
are dead?  I just saw them on the TV last night. ;->

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

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 10:24:45 -0700
From: Scott Ellsworth <Scott_Ellsworth@alumni.hmc.edu>
Subject: Re: T4+ 

At 05:51 PM 8/17/97 -0400, you wrote:
>OK.
>
>Here's an honest question.  And it's a hard one.  Aside from a few
>admittedly wonderful pictures (the T4 cover, Psionics Institutes,
>and maybe Central Supply catalog, along with a few others), who really
>thinks Chris Foss' artwork depicts Traveller in ANY ERA?

I uniformly dislike the Chris Foss Protuberant Artwork on most T4 books.
It just does not have the right scale for Traveller, in my opinion.  I
could not do better, but I do not like his stuff for this game.  The
interior illustrations of the main rulebook looked pretty good, but IIRC,
that was done by someone else.

Oh, in my universe, M0 is the land of wood burl shift knobs and hand rubbed
starship consoles, while TL15 is Blinkenlight Heaven.  I decided this
because there were all of those low tech planets in T4, and about the only
thing that a low tech culture can provide is personal servants and
handcrafted goodies, so those became status symbols in the early years.  By
1100, I ruled that the tech levels had evened out a bit more, so that any
planet being traded with regularly was likely within a TL or 2 of its
trading partners.

Despite that, the ships themselves look pretty much like they will a
thousand years later, just with lots and lots of strange luxury items and
as much of the tech as possible hidden.

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: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 10:45:35 -0700
From: Scott Ellsworth <Scott_Ellsworth@alumni.hmc.edu>
Subject: Slow grav vehicles

I note that the grav bikes and speeders that are in the CSC would be rather
difficult to design using the FF&S rules.  I do not mind that overmuch, but
I want to know how the Imperial designers get around this.

Because you are limited to .16G as your drive, a TL12 grav vehicle cannot
go faster than about 110KPH.  This means that there are no fuel-free mach
1+ grav bikes possible.

There are also no small, fast courier craft that use only electrical power.

There are two solutions as I see it within the FF&S rules:

1.  Put some heplar drives on your vehicles.  My back of the envelope
designs led me to believe you could make a grav bike with a 5G booster that
could have a good twenty minutes of booster fuel in a reasonable package.

2.  Put a 1t thruster plate and a 1t fusion+ plant in.  This means the
minimum size for a fast, fuel free vehicle is about 5t, when all is said
and done.

A third one that is reasonable, but not explicit.

3.  Add a new type of drive - the electrically powered fan.  This could
probably be hacked up from the helicopter rules, and would make a good
booster for fuel free, undetectable, but slow use.  This would probably not
push you above mach 1, but might be handy for the 110KPH-1000KPH range.

Extension proposals:

There should be improvements in gravitics between 12 and 16.  I am thinking
that you should be able to get .25, .50, .75, and .90G or something like
that at TL 13, 14, 15, and 16.  The sizes, etc., do not necessarily need to
change.

There should be improvements in thruster plates as TL advances.  Perhaps
the minimum size drops from 10m^3 to 1m^3 over that time?

Alternatively, the thrust/weight ratio might improve as well.  I am not yet
sure I want to deal with that, as that alters ship design, but it seems
like all components should get better as time passes.  For jump drives, the
capacitors and power plant part of the system will improve, while for
maneuver drives, it seems like a TL15 ship should get more drive out of the
same space than a TL12.

Any interest in extending these charts?

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: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 14:07:31 -0400
From: "Chris Cox" <chriscox@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: New ships on my web page

If anyone interested, my August THUDDD entry is available on-line at
(http://users.aol.com/ogerdude/sdb.htm) It has been added to my web pages,
the Draconis cluster (http://users.aol.com/yanbeck/trav.htm). It include
stats for both T4 and TNE, an illustration and a set of deckplans.

Also a couple of weeks back I finally added my March THUDDD entry, the  Erlir
class patrol cruiser (http://members.aol.com/ogerdude/patcru.htm) to Draconis
Cluster.  You may want to check it out also if your in the neighborhood.

Chris Cox
"Investment banking galley slave in New York City"
(chricox@ix.netcom.com)

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 14:04:20 -0400
From: "Glenn Crawford" <glennc@nelvana.com>
Subject: Eurocentrism (and Americocentrism)

Speaketh the Stephen;
Ah come on Marc, that's weak and you know it!  Traveller is VERY
Eurocentric in terms of cultural bias.  Where are all the Indian colonies?
Still on Earth. 

Given their population pressures you have to KNOW they tried to ship some of
them off to the stars.  And all the ones who went would not have been
speaking the Queen's English!
And why the bloody hell not, sirrah! Like it or not, English is the dominant
language of science and economics. Rome took hundreds of years to die even
after it had become VERY decadent. I see no reason American predominance on
this planet will end anytime soon (ie less than a couple hundred years). 

What about China?  Indonesia?  Africa?  South America?  Where in Traveller
Canon is the mention of the doubtlessly MASSIVE contribution they made?
Gee, look at the massive contribution they've made to the space program so
far....

I'm not trying to be PC here but common sense requires they be noticed at
least! Combined they only make 3/4 of the Human population. ;)
And about 10% of the economic activity and even less in the scientific
fields. Not to belittle them too much, but the economic engine of this
planet is still the West (North America and Western Europe)

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 13:38:37 -0400
From: "Paul D. Owensby" <pauld@athens.net>
Subject: Fighters, fatigue, bathrooms, and zero-G beds

><< And do so in only a few hours (*nobody* can fly a fighter longer than
>that, between fatigue and the lack of a bathroom...)>>
>
>  Oh, quite the contrary. Fighter pilots are fitted with, shall we say
>"equipment," that eliminates the necessity of a latrine in the plane for long
>flights.

In addition, physical fatigue would be reduced greatly by just having what-
ever internal gravity there may be switched off. There is IMHO a large 
difference between being stuck in the cockpit of an F15 for 12 hours under-
going the pull of gravity making your legs and butt get numb and tired on
the seat underneath you, and floating just off the seat in a natural fetal 
position with no strain on your body in an inertially damped space fighter.
Sure, for combat you will be strapped in tight, but for a long run out some-
wheres with no combat expected, you'd be expected to loosen up the
belts a bit and float, perhaps catch a few Z's with the computer set to wake
you if anything funny is detected.

This is a reason the staterooms on my ship plans tend to be smaller than the
usual design, I don't include beds in my deckplans. I can't imagine any 
culture that has gravitic control as an everyday fact of life not having 
zero g beds as the norm while planet side. Using this as a given (in my
campaign, at least), I can see absolutely no reason to wasted valuable
shipboard space on anything more complex than a containment system
(i.e. net) attached to the wall to hold you in place, or at most a type of 
closet/cubby like some of the shuttle folks sleep in now.

**********************************************************
Paul Darius Owensby (pauld@athens.net)                   
ValuJump Lines:"So Economical, You'll Think You're Part of the Crew" (tm)
Pan-Imperia: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/Paul_Owensby/
Home of ValuJump Lines, Pan-Imperia Shipyards, and Beginnings for DOS.

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 11:57:33 -0700
From: Scott Ellsworth <Scott_Ellsworth@alumni.hmc.edu>
Subject: Re: ARRRRGGGHH!!! Mk. II

At 05:28 PM 8/17/97 -0700, you wrote:
>>FFS2 was stated to be the no-math-barred gearhead design system.  A
>>developer's tool as it were.  It was never, ever, pitched or talked
>>about as anything else (here or on the beta list).
>
>A high-complexity developer's tool without a system to use it. This is
>so manifestly pointless as to be frightening.

Er - how else are simple systems?  If there is not a high complexity system
underlying them, then they are usually terribly inconsistent in ways
obvious the first time you try to use it.  This is simple fact, and can be
witnessed right here in River City.  Take any two design systems hiding in
Traveller, and part of why they are completely inconsistent is that they
are running from different assumptions.

Hell, even Star Trek, land of inconsistency, has a writer's guide that
describes how the tech works.  FF&S is the equivalent for Traveller.  It,
or something like it, is needed, imho, as you get bizarre systems otherwise.

>>SSDS and QSDS were made with FFS (with modifications), period.  It
>>sounds like if either of these systems had more plug-ins your
>>complaints wouldn't exist.  Given that a "secret" fixed FFS version
>>is the basis of the later, easy to use design systems, it makes
>>sense to print the damn thing so that others with the desire can
>>make more plug-ins.
>
>God damn it, you seem to think that I'm just whining about the
>complexity level -- as though I had a nice safe user-friendly
>alternative. The FACT is that if I want to design a fighter craft
>(nothing esoteric, like battle armor or blimps or even combat choppers),
>or a dreadnaught, or anything over 5000 tons and not of TL10-12 that I
>am pretty much WITHOUT options. 

The examples you ask for do need to be printed.  From a complicated system,
you can create simple ones, like QSDS.  If you have a complicated system,
you need simple ones, and you need a whole pile of examples.  I want a game
with hundreds of ships, dozens of deck plans, various weapons, tanks, and
all that other stuff.  Without something like FF&S in the hands of the
people designing the simple systems, and likely in the hands of the
designers of many of the example vehicles, I do not think it is going to
happen.

Methinks you are not getting Doug's point.  You seem to be saying that IG
should have printed up one of the alternative, simpler, systems as well as
a combat system first.  Perhaps you are right, but someone has to write the
thing, and if they have different assumptions from the other authors, you
get two different things that do not connect.  Further, if the designer
does not have a book like FF&S, the system consists of tables filled with
random numbers that do not mesh well.

Yes, I know that FF&S looks like that, but the tables are not completely
random - they come from an underlying assumption set, and if the book is
complete enough, then the simple systems derived from it will work right.
This was done, and the result is a system that lets whoever updates QSDS
make a system that produces ships that are OK, and reasonably close to what
a scaled up grav tank might do.  Or that a detailed design might allow.


...
>Oh. Ah. I see. It's all IG's fault for not keeping up with the authors,
>who continue to charge innovatively ahead and design ever-more complex,
>evermore incompatible design systems for a game that cannot make use of
>what they generate.

Don't be disingenuous.  IG has decided not to PAY FOR a design system and a
combat system at the same time.  I think they should have, but they did
not.  When they get off their asses and decide that they need a combat
system, then they will contract with someone, likely one of the people who
contributed to FF&S.  The combat system will then be reasonably consistent.
 If they are smart, they will make a design goal that the system be
playable at a fun level in under an hour, and preferably under half an hour
for a simple ship to ship deal.  Like the original Starfire game - easy to
run, easy to learn, easy to play, and not that hard to make very difficult
if that is how you like it.

I keep hammering away on consistency for a reason: it makes a big
difference, and without something like FF&S, you are not going to have it.
Example: Traveller starship lasers have megajoule plus muzzle energies and
fire control that can hit at light second distances.  On that scale, grav
tanks are toast.  I need to know that when I play the "low tech fighter
against merchant ship" adventure.  If they do not want that, then they
better pay attention to what they get.

I do not need FF&S to figure that out, but I need both my grav tank and my
starship to have something like the same assumptions.  As a result, HOWEVER
I design my grav tank and my starship, they better both come to kind of
similar results.  Without something like FF&S in the hands of the guy who
writes my simple system, I am sunk without a trace.

...

>In brief, I should simply have taken up checkers for a year and a half,
>waited for FF&S2 to come out, then bum a spreadsheet for it off
>somebody. Groovy. NOW you tell me.

Ok, let me try a different phrasing.  NOT A SINGLE FUCKING PERSON ON THIS
LIST RUNS IG.  THE SONS OF BITCHES WHO DO THAT DO NOT LISTEN TO US, AND DO
NOT SPEND ENOUGH TIME IN TESTING AND PROOFING PRODUCTS BEFORE THEY SHIP THEM.

Marc Miller listens, sometimes, but he does not plan what IG is going to
do.  Doing that would take him away from the game design that he is clearly
good at and enjoys.  Blaming the authors of FF&S for inconsistencies in
previous products is not going to help.  And saying that they should have
been consistent with one of the previous systems in not really all that
possible.  IIRC, the system in Starships and Guy's QSDS are both based on
FF&S, the original, and as a result, this one is going to get results kind
of like those.  As a result, the old starship design systems are at least
sort of consistent, and they could not be more so without this boo, or one
like it.

>ANY BOOK FOR DESIGNING HARDWARE THAT HAS NO SYSTEM FOR USING IT IS A
>WASTE OF TIME AND MONEY, and only a techno-game-geek locked into their
>own private litle introverted universe could possibly fail to understand
>(and hence be offended by) this.

Bullshit.

You either design the results first, and hope to God they make some kind of
sense when you combine them, or you design the design system first, make it
consistent, and then make a combat system that makes them playable.  In the
ideal case, the public sees neither one before the other is done, and if
you it the second way, it is a lot easier to play test the combat rules.
(Since combats need more people to play than design fests, you want to make
that easier to test.)

To be honest, what I would have done is:

At the same time, cost and spec out FF&S, the Naval/Ground battle book, and
the Example Designs book.  All three are developed at the same time, and
the Example designs book is the test suite for the rest of it.  As you
fiddle with the system, you have a stock set of designs that have to work
right.

Example Designs consists of a ten page system like QSDS, ten pages of
combat rules, and sixty pages of ships, tanks, guns, missiles, and so on.
From the moment you get this, you can be running a game within hour, and be
done an hour after that.

Eventually, you will want more details, and then FF&S and the Battle Book
are waiting for you.

You cannot, though, have the simple system without building the complex
one, because then you end up with exactly the situation you are complaining
about.  A dozen different systems, all with different core assumptions.  A
starship system that makes no sense when ANYONE with even an idiot's
conception of science looks at it.  Even an idiot knows that cities die
when nuked.  If I have nukes as primary staship weapons, then he is going
to think of blasting a city with one.  What stops him?  Nuclear dampers on
high tech planets, which is something that a simple system probably does
not need to cover, because they are big and expensive.

Every potential player of an SF game probably knows enough science to see
the flaws, so if your game has science in it, you better do it sort of
right.  By having the complexity available, the science is potentially
consistent.  Like any SF, you cannot blow suspension of disbelief with
incosistency.

I am not claiming that the present situation is perfect, or even good, but
I find it hopeful.  T4 has been out for less than a year, and we now have a
decent design base.  If they get their thumbs out, continue to support
adventures like TLWH, and make it a quest to never release a supplement
with a map-text problem like M0, they have a much better shot.

I really think IG has a process problem - everything they produce suffers
to a greater or lesser extent from being rushed to market.

Example: FF&S needs the combat system, and both need an approachable system
for people who are not programmers.  This is obvious to me, and to the
designers, and everyone else looking.  With FF&S2, they have the
complicated stuff, and now a simple program can generate tables for
something like QSDS, and will produce a simple system where you do not need
to know what a square root is.  The end user does not write the program,
and should not even know it exists.  Most customers just see a ten page
ship design system that takes under 15 minutes to navigate, and a ten page
combat system that is neat and easy to play.

Given the interdependence, you release all three at the same time.  You
have to release the simple ones and the examples first, or you lose some
sales, but once the complicated ones are done, why hold on to them.
Therefore, simultaneous release.

IG gets to sell books full of new and better ships, guns, etc.  They have
easy fodder for the people who can get the system.  This would have
required a decent test time, and a decent combat system, which they have to
pony up the money for.  IG does not like doing that.

Standing behind QSDS and putting it on their web site would be an elegant
solution to the simple design system problem, as then the simple system is
free for download.  Putting up a five page combat system would work fairly
well, as then people could "try it out."  If they try that before they get
the hard rules done, then they end up with inconsistencies JUST like those
between the vehicle design system and every one of the starship design
systems, so they better have the hard combat system done before they post
the easy one.

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: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 13:00:23 -0600
From: Erwin Fritz <efritz@glja.com>
Subject: Re: How Big is Your Starport?

Robert Eaglestone wrote:
> 
> 1. Calculate Size Index
> -----------------------
> Starport size = floor (The number of populated worlds within 2 parsecs / 3)

and later

>               Value of starports on worlds within 2 parsecs

It's a nice rule. Seeing stuff like this is THE reason I subscribe
to this list. However, I have a question. Why the fixation on
a 2 parsec distance for neighboring worlds? I'm curious because it
seems to me that higher TL worlds should use longer distances than
that.

Or am I missing something? Maybe you're following the KISS rule.

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 15:21:57 -0400
From: "Clark, William" <Clark@bessemer.com>
Subject: Task Chapter: Comments, Observations, Questions

The following are comments, observations and questions that I have concerning
the Tasks chapter.  In general, I like the style of presentation and writing
a lot.

Observation:  In the introduction, half-dice should be half-die.

Observation:  In the first paragraph of An Overview Of Tasks the first
    sentence should read:
        A task expresses an action....

Comment:  The format for the task statement itself is confusing because of
    the use of the symbol <.  Since the task statement deals primarily with
    numbers, upon first reading this I take the statement to mean add 
    characteristic, skill and modifiers and the dice roll must be greater
    that this number.  Of course, the dice roll needs to be less than or
    equal to this number (for success that is).  I think either a different
    symbol should be used or another format.  A possible format instead:

            Difficulty, Characteristic, Skill
                Modifiers

            To repair a grav vehicle.
            Difficult, Dex, Gravitics
                +1 for Tools (required)
            Probably takes several hours.

Comment: Drop the half die for difficult tasks.  If a half die was used
    more extensively in the game system, I would say keep it, but if it
    is only going to be used for difficult task resolution, drop it and
    make the progression a smooth one from 1D to 6D.

Observation:  The target number in the Rolling Tasks section should be:
    (12 + 2) = 14

Comment:  Label the task for box Universal Task Format (like it is at the
    end of the document)

Comment:  Under Task Modifiers, an example or two (maybe one for having
    necessary items, another as a situation based modifier) would be nice.

Observation:  The first sentence in the section Half Dice doesn't make
    sense.

Comment:  In the paragraph When Easy Tasks Are Hard, I would suggest that
    easy tasks are always rolled.  The reason is two-fold.  First, the
    paragraph does not deal with modifiers, such as, for example, direct
    fire combat at night (night adding a negative modifier which could
    make an automatic Easy task for someone no longer automatic).  Second,
    the referee should be allowed to keep some modifiers secret for
    various types of tasks, especially if the characters are unaware of a
    situation modifier.  For example,

        To avoid a police car in a high speed pursuit.
        Difficult (2.5D): Dex, Ground Craft
            -3 for not noticing black ice on road
            -2 for not noticing bald tires
        Road is covered up ahead with black ice.

Observation:  The second sentence in the first paragraph of Default Skills
    should read:
        Any character may attempt a task which specifies a skill that is
        designated as a Default Skill,.....

Question:  Under Cooperative Tasks, in the past, the character with the
    highest skill level would add their characteristic to the task attempt,
    not the character with the highest characteristic.  Is this a change?

Question:  Under Opposed Tasks, is N, the number of characters, referring to
    1 side only, both sides equally or both sides total?  Also, how do the
    participants on each side contribute their skills and characteristics,
    as it is done under cooperative tasks, or total all appropriate values?

Observation:  The explanation of the Uncertain Task example should read:
        The player would roll 1.5D and the referee would secretly roll 1D.
        Assuming Int 7 and Fast Talk-3 and he has the Fake ID, the required
        roll must be 11 or less on 2.5D.  If the player rolls 3, he knows
        he must have succeeded (since even if the hidden die roll is 6, the
        task would succeed); if the player rolls 11, he knows he must have
        failed (since even if the hidden die roll is only 1, the task would
        fail).  But if he rolls between 6 and 10, he cannot know if he
        succeeded or failed until the referee indicates the results of the
        third die.

Comment:  The sections Task Without Skill and Tasks With Skill Only provide
    a very good explanation of and add flexibility to the task system.

Question:  In the Spectacular Results section, does the rolling of 3 1's or
    6's include the result on any half die (before of after dividing by two)?
    What about uncertain tasks, does the die/dice rolled by the referee
    contribute to the determination of spectacular results?

Question:  In the section Probabilities, why should the probabilities of
    spectacular results always be the same (disregarding the special case
    involving a half die), regardless of difficulty level?

Question:  Can hasty or cautious tasks increase the task level beyond
    Hopeless or below Easy, respectively?

Observation:  In the section Duration, the last sentence of the first
    paragraph of the description of Cautious tasks should read:
Uncertainty is unaffected....

Question:  Under Jack of All Trades, can this skill be now used in place of
    default and non-default skills?

Question:  Is the section Divided Attention replacing the multiple actions
    rule from T4?

Comment:  The paragraph Don't overdo pre-defined tasks has almost nothing
    to do with the title.

Observation:  The last sentence of The Role Of The Referee is incomplete.

Observation:  The last paragraph of 2. Express the Task Statement has
    information that should be in the section 3. Express The Task Comments

Comment:  The sections An Understanding Of Tasks and Task In Action give
    excellent insight into the thoughts behind the system.

Observation:  The third line of the fifth paragraph under An Understanding
    Of Tasks should be either
        Strength-4 and Skill 8
            or
        Strength-3 and Skill-9

Observation:  Remove the last sentence from the fourth paragraph under
    Tasks In Action.  This is the Tasks Chapter.

Observation:  The fourth sentence in the section Difficult Tasks under 
   Tasks in Action should read:
        Spectacular Failure happens if the roll is three 6's.

Observation:  The first sentence in the section More Training should read
        ...is the same as Dex 11 and Demolitions-1...

Comment:  The idea of a Task Library is really nice for commonly used
    tasks.

Observation:  The section The Exploits of Darkhamaar's Crew is incomplete.

- --
Bill Clark (clark@bessemer.com)

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1710
***********************************
Traveller-digest      Monday, August 18 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1711



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Net Illiterate
Re: E21 Chronology
Re: M:E21
Re: T41 Skills Draft C Chemistry
Re: alternate tech discussion
New Traveller Software
Re: evenet horizon
Re: Slow grav vehicles
Re: ARRRRGGGHH!!! Mk. II
Re: Flawed accumulator energy densities
GDW-Beta
M-Drives & QSDS
En Garde
Re: ARRRRGGGHHH!!!! (was: FF&S 2 spreadsheets, anyone?)
Re:Asia in Traveller
Re: Martial Arts in T4.1?
Re: T41 Skills Draft A Armorer
Re: ARRRRGGGHH!!! Mk. II

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 13:21:36 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: Re: Net Illiterate

On 18 Aug 1997, Rob Prior wrote:

> WHUFFO is 'Ebonics' (1) not netspeak.
> 
> Whuffo (also written "wuhffo" and "wuhfo") literally means "what for". It
> translates as "why did", "why do", "why does" or other variations depending
> on context.  (Tenses in Ebonics appear to be optional.)  "Whuffo yo do that?"
> translates as "Why did you that?" or "Why are you doing that?" depending on
> context.
> 
> 
> Note: not to be confused with "muhfo", which literally means someone who has
> intercourse with their maternal parent, but in context can be either an
> insult, a simple noun (roughly equivalent to "guy"), or a complement.
> 
> 
> Notice the absence of smilies.  I wish I was making this up as a joke, but
> I'm not.  Students actually earn high school credits by learning this stuff.
> 
> 
> 
> (1) "Ebonics" - ie. Black English - has been officially recognized as a
> second language, as opposed to a dialect of English, in some parts of the
> USA.  
> 

Whoa whoa whoa there! Ebonics was 'recognized' under some highly
misunderstood guidelines in ONE, (1) school district, Oakland CA.

What it _is_ is a clearly recognizable dialect, with distinct rules and
grammar. Ask the linguists who actually study it.

The 'second language' bit got convoluted when the school administrators in
Oakland 'made it so' for the purposes of integrating the children who
speak nothing but ebonics into the classroom.

What it is _not_ is a commiesymp pinko plot to degrade our children until
they're so dumb they'll watch stuff like MTV and TV sitcoms (hey
waitafrigginminute...maybe the commiesymp pinkos WON!)

It's right up there in misinformation whith the current twits in Cingress
all up in arms because the US refuses to destroy the public school system
infavor of private ones. They had some dumba** congresscritter up spouting
about how "All Amurrican children deserve the chances that Chelsea Clinton
has..."

Why yes, they do, if you can put up the tutition required yearly that the
Clintons pay out of their own pocket..duh! But handing money from the
public funds to pay for private schools is government subsidy,
nothing less, something that these stupid Republicans are too blind to see
if it bites them on the a**.

Sorry, but there are a lot of nutcases out there siezed upon the entire
"Ebonics" thing to call for things like dissolving the entire public
school system, 'give' the parts away to private industry who could then
run them 'oh so much more efficiently'. Sort of nationalization in
reverse.

Private schools work because A) they can accept, deny or kick out _anyone_
they want for _any_ reason they want, and b) they typically spend a _hell_
of a lot more per student than public schools.

Sorry, the rant is _completely_ off topic, I'll return you now to the
"Foss art destroyed IG by making them use gearheads to write FFS2 with
Bic NearC Virocks" flame now in progress.

Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 16:27:02 -0400
From: Daniel Ray Lane <drlane@pinn.net>
Subject: Re: E21 Chronology

> 
>    2300 AD used a "realistic" star map, which took a three dimensional
> image of space and turned it into a two dimensional one.  It was a
> *pain* to use, and God help you if you wanted to go another star
> system.  Truly realistic star maps will not become a reality until you
> can convince a game company to produce space modelling software (and
> make it a standard part of the game) that can be run on a laptop
> computer (Pentium or Pentium II unless you mind cheesy graphics), *and*
> the cost of laptop computers comes *way* down.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Harold

CHView does this rather nicely.  Looks good too and allows for a lot
of data.  Hats off to Jo Grant and Ben Lin (and others?).  Its a great
tool and fun to use.

- -Dan Lane

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 21:44:27 +0100
From: Simon Early <sre@taz.compulink.co.uk>
Subject: Re: M:E21

Don't you think it strange that the transistor was discovered *after* 
the Roswell/Vilani incident :-)

Simon

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 16:58:26 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: T41 Skills Draft C Chemistry

In a message dated 97-08-18 14:26:10 EDT, you write:

<< 
 Nick
 
 formerly University of Cambridge, Dept. of Chemistry
 and now working in chemical information systems
 
 Dr. Nick Munn, Dept. of Information Studies, University of Sheffield
 Tel. (0)114 222 2673, email n.s.munn@sheffield.ac.uk
  >>

Nick.

Your well-stated evaluation of Chemistry is just what I was looking for. You
don't happen to have similar expertise in Geology, Psychology, History, etc?

Marc

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 16:43:30 -0400
From: Daniel Ray Lane <drlane@pinn.net>
Subject: Re: alternate tech discussion

> I *hope* GDW-Beta becomes a *hotbed* of alternative technology
> development
> during the next few months...how about it Guy?  If not there, maybe MPGN
> would create another list for us here.  I *would* have suggested ISBA,
> as
> an alternative site, but they are more focused on using what we already
> have rather than developing new technology.
> 

I agree that TML might not be the best forum for this.  Perhaps the nuts
and bolts of the tech should be explored elsewhere.  But it SHOULD be
explored and incorporated/extrapolated/interpolated into the game.  Maybe
and end of discussion summary would do for each topic could be posted
to the TML for consumption.  A succinct, useful, gameable version.  

We need to explore future tech vigorously so that Traveller doesn't 
become an unintentional Space 1889 (i.e., badly outdated tech ideas).

Eric has already noted the problem with accumulators and I've noted the
power plant problem.  These affect the hard science of the game just as
much as if you planted an balmy earthlike world out near Pluto.

I somehow don't think we'll be using silicon chips in 100 years.

- -Dan Lane

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

Date: 18 Aug 1997 20:57:18 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: New Traveller Software

I've finally been able to upload a new Traveller application, as well as an
update to an older one.  Both can be found at
<http://www.interlog.com/~dmci104/GamingClub/Traveller/software.html>

CSC
- ---

This is a Q&D Macintosh application that implements the design system found
in CSC.  Note hugely compatible with FFS, I'm afraid, but then the CSC stuff
doesn't seem to be that compatible with Real Life (tm).  (Ie. I haven't been
able to design a WWII Jeep for less than 45k, or my 1987 Tercel for less than
15k, or a Greek/Roman galley that comes near actual performance.) 

For what it's worth, though, here is the program.


Metator
- -------

Here is an updated version of Metator (now up to v1.0.3d).  Features
supported:

1) System generation using an updated version of Scouts/MT.  Systems
displayed as a list of UWPs, a schematic view (similar to Long Way Home), or
with circular orbits and actual positions.  Map scale can be set to linear,
logarithmic, or schematic diagram.

2) Worlds detailed using World Builders Handbook, TNE, real science, and some
homebrew rules.  Core type, density, gravity, horizon distance, atmospheric
composition...  Also includes social data like government branches, law and
tech level by area, unusual customs...

3) World maps created (not good ones, though).

4) Starship encounter tables created (my homebrew system,based on world stats
and milieu). User can add starships to the available types.

5) Trade tables created using my homebrew system
<http://www.interlog.com/~dmci104/GamingClub/Traveller/trade.html>.  User can
add to list of exports.  Passenger and freight rolls also displayed.

6) Animal encounter tables generated.

7) Temperature tables generated, as well as weather tables (from Grand
Survey).

8) Air pressure and water pressure tables (for those who like mountaineering
and diving).


Things missing:

1) Some star data (didn't have my books on holiday).

2) Evolutionary diagrams (coming, just incomplete).

3) Mountain diagrams (may make this one a separate program).

4) Better world maps.

5) Printing of colour pictures.  (You can print schematic map symbols,but I'd
rather print custom colour/grayscale icons :-)



PS.  For those of you waiting for responses from IG, I emailed this software
to them several times (starting last summer), mailed a disk to the Beverly
Hills address, and still haven't received an acknowledgement that they
received anything, let alone a response to my original offer to _give_ them
the software!  

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 16:27:14 +0000
From: Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: evenet horizon

mark.wilkin wrote:
> 
> Errrrrr people could you not tell any of us non-american's any spoilers for
> this film I'm quite looking forward to seeing it when it gets over here.
> thanks :-)

I am conscious of this, Mark, and I am always careful not to give away
anything for anyone who has not yet seen the movie in any of my reviews.


As for the others...I am not responsible.

Kenneth.

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 15:07:57 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: Re: Slow grav vehicles

On Mon, 18 Aug 1997, Scott Ellsworth wrote:

> I note that the grav bikes and speeders that are in the CSC would be rather
> difficult to design using the FF&S rules.  I do not mind that overmuch, but
> I want to know how the Imperial designers get around this.
> 
> Because you are limited to .16G as your drive, a TL12 grav vehicle cannot
> go faster than about 110KPH.  This means that there are no fuel-free mach
> 1+ grav bikes possible.

I know, (whine whine...I tried , but couldn't do it)

> There are also no small, fast courier craft that use only electrical power.
> 
> There are two solutions as I see it within the FF&S rules:
> 
> 1.  Put some heplar drives on your vehicles.  My back of the envelope
> designs led me to believe you could make a grav bike with a 5G booster that
> could have a good twenty minutes of booster fuel in a reasonable package.

Yeah, but you've got an exhause that would be, ahem, kind of a pain to
have happen in anything near urban environments...fusion hot plasma does
that. ;-)

> 2.  Put a 1t thruster plate and a 1t fusion+ plant in.  This means the
> minimum size for a fast, fuel free vehicle is about 5t, when all is said
> and done.

Actually, IIRC, the base size for Thruster plates is considerably bigger
than that, limiting Thrust Plate craft to something like 50 or 100 t or
greater.

> A third one that is reasonable, but not explicit.
> 
> 3.  Add a new type of drive - the electrically powered fan.  This could
> probably be hacked up from the helicopter rules, and would make a good
> booster for fuel free, undetectable, but slow use.  This would probably not
> push you above mach 1, but might be handy for the 110KPH-1000KPH range.

Ahhh, yes, ducted fans. This is something that is sorely missing from FFS
completely: with the advent of insanely cheap power via Fusion+, electric
motors become vastly more important, and really should be covered as power
sources for 'thrust' agencies. Sadly, the _old_ FFS allowed that, with
propellors, wheels, etc needing X amoount of power, without really
specifying what the power is. 

At Tl12, especially with the advances that RT superconductors can bring,
you can get some very powerful, light electric motors. Hell, even modern
electric motors would work, with a properly designed ducted fan.

Sadly I know NADA about such things in the real world, ie power/weight,
how big a ducted fan has to be to generate X thrust, etc.

SNIP

> 
> Any interest in extending these charts?

Absolutely!


Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 15:15:01 -0700
From: JayStr <jaystr@best.com>
Subject: Re: ARRRRGGGHH!!! Mk. II

>I think you are whining that Traveller isn't custom designed just for >you.

>You have three choices.  Either breakdown and spend $25 on a scientific
>calculator, get one of the many spreadsheets avalible, or wait for those
>folks who do QSDS packages to get around to it.

>Of course, you can use
>ships built with FFS2 with BL, RPSC, or any other Traveller combat system
>because everything is in real world units.

>You want a dradnought?  Here:

>Marvin class dreadnought.

>Size: REAL Big
>Guns: Lots
>Armor: Thick
>Apperance: Big Shiny wedge

>Anything more will require that somebody sit down and hack out the >numbers.


Marbles off a sidewalk. 

Every time I think we've ascended to new heights of unreality, we reach
another plateau. You just plain cannot talk to people who are so utterly
hostile to the idea of simplicity that they mistake internal consistency
for Star-Trek mushiness and unwieldy complexity for psuedo-realism. The
Politics Of Bullshittium have laid T4 low.

Look, dude, I can pick from a plethora of published designs in every
other game system extant, not merely one or two archtypical examples
scattered across several different supplements. As far as 'hacking
numbers', I could design my own vehicles, fighters, and big badass space
cruisers in Traveller Classic and even MegaTraveller, which was easy to
sit down and use although it required you to refigure everything every
third step, and took a helluva lot longer that it ought to have. It is
not like being able to build your own stuff WITHOUT a scientific
calculator is some sort of novel requirement on my part.

What I want, and what will sell, is a game system that is internally
consistent and comprehensible and will let me do roughly what I want.
Even in MT, this is what we had. I do not WANT and should not HAVE to
consult countless errata and download countless spreadsheets to include
the most basic of items in my campaign. After a year's waiting and $120,
I want to be able to do it myself out of published materials. That's not
whining, or forcing my personal dictates on anyone. That's utterly
real-world reasonable, and the bare-assed minimum that any game system
that wishes to survive should muster. I want not perfection, but
competancy... and an assurance that each book I buy will not be
invalidated every few months.

As it is, VDS, QSDS, SSDS, FF&S2, and our published catalog of
spacecraft all disagree with each other (oh, and FF&S 2 is MOSTLY
consistent with the old FF&S save in sensors and Fusion +. Only the eyes
& ears and power supply of every sub-100-ton vehicle in the Traveller
universe. Merely that. No problem for any COMPETANT human being to
figure out... save that I shouldn't have to figure it out to begin with,
but that's just selfish whining on my part. Oh, so the sensor arrays in
all my QSDS and SSDS craft are now botched and will have to be refigured
in order to be canon, and I will have to spend another $25 for the
privilege of doing IG's work for them. Hey, no sweat).

Not to mention that whatever game system IG ultimately comes out with
will now have to include a full array of tables and charts so that all
that 'real-world data' you're so proud of can be converted into useable
information BEFORE they can play. Perhaps you do not understand that
this is more brain-twisting trouble than 99% of the gamer community will
wish to go to.

IG's only (slim) chance to save their asses will be to put whatever
spreadsheets you guys come up with on their Web site for free download.
In the meantime, everyone in the real world who wants to know what a
micro-second is within the game (or mass, or a G-hour, or how all of
this useless verbiage impacts the performance of whatever designs they
can cough up) will have to go with their questions unanswered. At least
a spreadsheet allows them to ignore such things, instead of having to
painrtakingly edit the design system for what is relevant and what
isn't.

It is a bit as though AD&D included the tensile strength and Rockwell
hardness of every weapon and piece of armor in the game, but didn't tell
you WHY.... and gave you only leather, plate, and shield as stock armor;
and required you -- if you wanted anything more comprehensive than this
absurdly limited array of personal protection (and why the hell would
you want different kinds of armor in a heroic fantasy game?) -- to go
buy a $25, nightmarishly complex game-designers supplement and a $30
scientific calculator and learn how to use them both.... 

.....and on top of it all, obstinantly refused to give you a more
advanced combat system that MADE USE of things like tensile strength,
stress points, etc. (not that 90% of gamers would be able to use it if
it existed.) Oh, but wait -- there are three or four published
designer's supplements, and none of them are consistent with the other,
or even with the published lists of weapons and armor..... which one to
use?

I guess every baffled, whiney-assed gamer who doesn't have access to the
digest -- and hence your noble efforts to make this monster you have
wrought accessable to the rest of us -- will just have to go hang.

- -- Jay Stranahan

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 22:28:24 -0400
From: Eric Freitas <edf@atlantic.net>
Subject: Re: Flawed accumulator energy densities

At 10:19 PM 8/17/97 PST, you wrote:
>In mail you write:
>Unfortunately, to use these as a power source, you have to be able to
>use an output voltage noticeably lower than the max voltage of the
>capacitor. 

DC to DC converters could be used to increase the output voltage, you 
just have to be careful to purchase (or build) one that can handle 
high currents.

>And add circuitry to keep the discharge at the lower voltage
>until the voltage in the cap drops below it.

I'm not sure what you mean by this.  The output voltage of a capacitor
when fully charged is equal to the voltage level used to charge it.  
What you need to worry about is the amount of resistance in the 
load across the output, which will limit the current across the load.
If the resistance is too low (no matter what voltage level the cap
is charged to, ie: 2.5v or 100v), and the capacitor has been charged
enough it can do anything from simply warm that load up to vaporizing
it.  The useful figure here is the energy, in joules, that is stored
in the device.  Hmm, I don't know how much energy it takes to 
vaporize 3cm off the end of a large screwdriver (I'm sure someone
could tell me, and yes I once watched from five feet away while an
electric company employee proceeded to do this; Wow!) but it may be 
possible with a 100F - 2.5v capacitor, it's only 312.5J fully 
charged though.
 
>For useful power units, you want this sort of capacitor, but with 100
>or 1000 volt capability. Just pray that a bullet doesn't hit one of
>them, as the energy release will be moderately explosive. :-)

Couldn't we use DC-DC converters(like above), or even put the 
current through an inverter and then use high voltage/current 
multipliers?  Thousand volt diodes are easy to come by, even if
their not inexpensive.

I've seen what happens when even a 1000uF @ 12V cap exploded once in
a lab, it's not something I'd want to be leaning over. ;-)


Eric Freitas
edf@atlantic.net

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 16:34:22 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: GDW-Beta

Could someone give me the info on subscribing to GDW-Beta, i seem to have
los the address..

Thanks.
- --
+------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry         dberry@hooked.net   |
| Gearhead & Planetologist, Traveller since 1977 |
|     Inquistor Magnus, Royal Commission for     |
|               Canon Correctness                |
|         http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|************************************************|
| "I believe in my heart that all astromoners    |
|  should be forced to go outside on summer      |
|  nights, just to admire the sky."  -Carl Sagan |
+------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 19:01:18 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: M-Drives & QSDS

Looking at QSDS1.5...

What manuever drives do TL9 jump capable ships use if Heplar starts at TL10...?

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"Omnia Mutantur Nihil Interit"  -  Sandman 'The Wake'
"Everything Changes, but nothing is truly lost" 

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 97 23:37:00 GMT 
From: s.johnson107@genie.com
Subject: En Garde

Ah, En Garde, though melding it with T4 would be a bit much.  Still, to whom
did the right for this one revert to?

Stephen

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 18:57:27 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: ARRRRGGGHHH!!!! (was: FF&S 2 spreadsheets, anyone?)

>Perhaps we better start thinking about T5?
>- -- Charles Li, M.D.

"T5 - Our last, best hope?"

;-)
<black globe up>

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"Omnia Mutantur Nihil Interit"  -  Sandman 'The Wake'
"Everything Changes, but nothing is truly lost" 

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 97 23:37:00 GMT 
From: s.johnson107@genie.com
Subject: Re:Asia in Traveller

On Sun, 17 Aug 1997 17:35:02, CardSharks@aol.com Wrote...

>> Ah come on Marc, that's weak and you know it!
> So official texts about Earth through the end of the Terran
> Confederation (canon, if you will) amount to maybe 10 pages of
> text, concentrating primarily on the broad sweep of history.
> Written from a Western bias I admit, as is most of Traveller.
> But the first emperor is Hiroshi I.
    ::chuckle:: Problem is I could actually see this happening too!  Perhaps as
you develop Mileu 200 and then the Rim and other places not yet visited in
terms of star maps or Canon.  You can tuck in pockets of the various other
cultures of Asia.  I could easily see a trickle of immigration to the Rimward
throughout the 2nd Imperium of Asians with their cultures trying to escape the
growing problems to Coreward and settle the virgin worlds beyond the reach of
Terra.
    That would go quite a ways to balancing things out, not to mention creating
some interesting situations out there. ;)

> At least it wasn't Miller.
    ROTFLMOL!!!  I conceed the point! <GRIN>

Stephen

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 97 23:37:00 GMT 
From: s.johnson107@genie.com
Subject: Re: Martial Arts in T4.1?

On  Sun, 17 Aug 1997 23:34:03, CardSharks@aol.com Wrote...

>> Fine, but change 'melee' to something like 'martial arts' or
>> 'unarmed  combat'.
> Calling it Martial Arts is misleading. It implies Kung Fo or
> Judo. (I always liked the illo of the guy with a shotgun and
> the title "Wester Martial Arts").
    And as many a Master I've trained with would say with a smile.  "And when
you have to reload?"  Dodging and finding cover is something people can get
very good at when their lives are threatened.  More to the point Traveller
really doesn't have a way of handling all the Martial Arts that exist or will
develop over the centuries to come.  This may seem like a small point but with
the usual lives the average PC leads they would run into this fairly
frequently.  Not to mention that it can make for great "chrome" for designing a
world or culture and something new to make the PC's lives... eventful!

> Calling it Unarmed Combat infringes on Brawling.
    EXACTLY!  Brawling as described is functionally untrained Hand to Hand and
it can be very effective, but because it is untrained it can leave huge
vulnerable holes in the Brawler's defensive and offensive repertoire.  It's the
difference between a bunch of folks picking up some weapons and going out and
getting into some firefights in the city and joining an actual military force
and training to fight in cities, and forests, and deserts, and on beaches, and
with combined arms teams, and with air support, and...
    See my point?  Sure, the bunch of folks who picked up some weapons and
survived some firefights in the city are gonna be pretty good at surviving and
fighting in a city environment.  How good are they going to be at fighting in a
desert?  With using or facing close air support?  This is just an analogy but
do you see the point I'm making?

Stephen

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 97 23:38:00 GMT 
From: s.johnson107@genie.com
Subject: Re: T41 Skills Draft A Armorer

On Sun, 17 Aug 1997 23:34:01, CardSharks@aol.com Wrote...

>> How are you planning to handle the differences in Tech Levels?
>> TL2-3 Armorer is going to know how to craft chain and plate mail
>> from scratch, swords and perhaps up to flintlock firearms.
>> However I seriously doubt
> This question applies to Armorer, Mechanic, Gravitics, Electronics,
> etc. So Fred ((from a LoTech world and with Armorer-3) isn't living
> in a vacuum...
> Technology, Training, and Ability
> Individuals come from a variety of technological backgrounds in the
> Traveller universe. The abilities conferred by skills are relatively
> tech level independent. That is to say, a MidTech individual with
> appropriate skill is skilled in the repair and maintenance of specific
> devices. While he might not be able to invent new devices at HiTech or
> VHiTech, he probably can puzzle out their maintenance and repair,
> especially if the appropriate manuals or technical supplies are
> available.
    Okay, this makes sense, however it's gonna cost more time the greater the
distance from the original TL at which the skill was used.  FoEx; A modern car
mechanic can go and fix an old Model-T, these vehicles are legendary for how
easy this is to do.  But if our car mechanic is used to using diagnostic
computers and all the other modern equipment he's gonna take a LOT longer to
figure out how to fix that Model-T.  It's certainly a simplier machine, but
it's completely different from what our car mechanic is used to dealing with.
This has economic implications BTW... ;)

> For example, Fred has Ground Craft-4. Since he comes from a LoTech
> world, much of his experience is with LoTech Ground Vehicles. Later
> in his life, he gets a job fixing cars, and when he does, he has
> access to diagnostic equipment, repair manuals, tools, and parts.
> Perhaps another mechanic would fix a car by repairing the axle
> spindle, but Fred just replaces the whole assembly. He has skill in
> achieving the end, but the way he gets there is shaped by his
> background.
    Marc, your mechanic must LOVE YOU if you let him get away with charging you
with a complete replacement rather then simply repairing the assembly!  Again,
this has economic implications.  I suspect part of this problem might come from
the fact that you're designing and thinking in terms of PC use of skills
exclusively.  BUT all of the skills in Traveller are used by NPCs to run the
various societies the PC encounter and move through.
    To take your example of Fred with a Ground Craft-4, he's going to want a
job using that skill.  Now thinking as an _Employer_ trying to _Make a Profit_
would you hire a LoTech Ground Craft-4 and put up with having to have to PAY
for his working through the learning curve to get up to speed with HiTech
equipment?  I'll tell you the economic reality, because I had an Uncle go
through this, No you will not!  As an Employer you expect a person to have a
certain level of competence with the task at hand, that's why you hired them!
    Now for PCs, struggling to handle all the variations in Tech they encounter
this may work.  It breaks down when it gets applied to the RW STS.

Stephen

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 17:19:12 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: ARRRRGGGHH!!! Mk. II

At 03:15 PM 8/18/97 -0700, you wrote:

>>Anything more will require that somebody sit down and hack out the >numbers.

>Marbles off a sidewalk. 
>
>Every time I think we've ascended to new heights of unreality, we reach
>another plateau. You just plain cannot talk to people who are so utterly
>hostile to the idea of simplicity that they mistake internal consistency
>for Star-Trek mushiness and unwieldy complexity for psuedo-realism. The
>Politics Of Bullshittium have laid T4 low.

You wanted simple, I gave you simple.  I've offered to design items for you
twice.  I now rescind that offer.  

>Look, dude, I can pick from a plethora of published designs in every
>other game system extant, not merely one or two archtypical examples
>scattered across several different supplements. As far as 'hacking
>numbers', I could design my own vehicles, fighters, and big badass space
>cruisers in Traveller Classic and even MegaTraveller, which was easy to
>sit down and use although it required you to refigure everything every
>third step, and took a helluva lot longer that it ought to have. It is
>not like being able to build your own stuff WITHOUT a scientific
>calculator is some sort of novel requirement on my part.

I have at 30 ship designs, done by various people, all in the same format.
You can't tell who used what to design what unless you are told.  I'm sure
that us gearheads could talk to Gold Rush Games and get paid to publish a
few books of ships.  Of course, right up until today, if you had asked, I
would have given them to you.

>What I want, and what will sell, is a game system that is internally
>consistent and comprehensible and will let me do roughly what I want.

It's called QSDS.  It came with the basic T4 rule book, and it was based on
FFS.  You bought a book that you did not need, and can't seem to use.  For
this, you are blaming the authors.  

>Even in MT, this is what we had. I do not WANT and should not HAVE to
>consult countless errata and download countless spreadsheets to include
>the most basic of items in my campaign.

MegaTraveller.  Not having to consult errata.  Excuse me while I laugh
myself sick for the next ten minutes.

I'm back.

>After a year's waiting and $120,
>I want to be able to do it myself out of published materials. That's not
>whining, or forcing my personal dictates on anyone. That's utterly
>real-world reasonable, and the bare-assed minimum that any game system
>that wishes to survive should muster. I want not perfection, but
>competancy... and an assurance that each book I buy will not be
>invalidated every few months.

QSDS is still a perfectly valid design system.  Use it, and i know that I'm
planning on submitting QSDS design packages to JTAS for all to use.  Why
are you so upset that other people have different needs?

>As it is, VDS, QSDS, SSDS, FF&S2, and our published catalog of
>spacecraft all disagree with each other (oh, and FF&S 2 is MOSTLY
>consistent with the old FF&S save in sensors and Fusion +. Only the eyes
>& ears and power supply of every sub-100-ton vehicle in the Traveller
>universe. Merely that. No problem for any COMPETANT human being to
>figure out... save that I shouldn't have to figure it out to begin with,
>but that's just selfish whining on my part. Oh, so the sensor arrays in
>all my QSDS and SSDS craft are now botched and will have to be refigured
>in order to be canon, and I will have to spend another $25 for the
>privilege of doing IG's work for them. Hey, no sweat).

How many small craft will you have to redesign?  Honestly.  How many.  As
for the sensors,  get ready, here is the ENTIRE set of instructions on
converting:  "use Table 204"  *gasp*.   I can see where you would rebel at
the thought of looking up one table.  (It is mislabeled, but easily found.)

>Not to mention that whatever game system IG ultimately comes out with
>will now have to include a full array of tables and charts so that all
>that 'real-world data' you're so proud of can be converted into useable
>information BEFORE they can play. Perhaps you do not understand that
>this is more brain-twisting trouble than 99% of the gamer community will
>wish to go to.

So a range table is beyond your understanding?  You can't comprehend a dama
ge results table?  I think you gravely underestimate the gaming community.

>IG's only (slim) chance to save their asses will be to put whatever
>spreadsheets you guys come up with on their Web site for free download.

Every Traveller related piece of software I know of is freeware.  Of
course, you never asked for it, just screamed at us.  Here's a secret, I do
all my hard work on a spreadsheet, with a pad of paper and a calculator for
side work.  It takes me 25 minutes to rough out a ship or weapons system
using FFS, and I'm waiting for a FFS2 spreadsheet.  I can do it, why can't
or won't you?

>In the meantime, everyone in the real world who wants to know what a
>micro-second is within the game (or mass, or a G-hour, or how all of
>this useless verbiage impacts the performance of whatever designs they
>can cough up) will have to go with their questions unanswered. At least
>a spreadsheet allows them to ignore such things, instead of having to
>painrtakingly edit the design system for what is relevant and what
>isn't.

It's all relevant, unless you want to play space fantasy.

>It is a bit as though AD&D included the tensile strength and Rockwell
>hardness of every weapon and piece of armor in the game, but didn't tell
>you WHY.... and gave you only leather, plate, and shield as stock armor;
>and required you -- if you wanted anything more comprehensive than this
>absurdly limited array of personal protection (and why the hell would
>you want different kinds of armor in a heroic fantasy game?) -- to go
>buy a $25, nightmarishly complex game-designers supplement and a $30
>scientific calculator and learn how to use them both.... 

Apples and Oranges.  AD&D is a game of High Heroic Fantasy.  It revels in
being highly unrealistic.  Traveller is a game that has always tried to
ground itself withing the posiibilities of science.  That is why we didn't
start out with "photonic blasters" and "lightsabres"  we started with
autopistols and cutlasses.  This is why Traveller suceeded, the internal
consistancy.

>....and on top of it all, obstinantly refused to give you a more
>advanced combat system that MADE USE of things like tensile strength,
>stress points, etc. (not that 90% of gamers would be able to use it if
>it existed.) Oh, but wait -- there are three or four published
>designer's supplements, and none of them are consistent with the other,
>or even with the published lists of weapons and armor..... which one to
>use?

Once again, AD&D has been essentialy unchanged since 1978.  Traveller has
had four completely different sets of rules.  Take a look at the state of
AD&D circa 1979, and tell me that it was any more complete.

>I guess every baffled, whiney-assed gamer who doesn't have access to the
>digest -- and hence your noble efforts to make this monster you have
>wrought accessable to the rest of us -- will just have to go hang.

Jay, there is a magazine called Journal of the Travellers' Aid Society,
edited by a nice lady named Jean.  She needs articles.  She really wants
articles.  So what I do is write articles for her.  If I choose, I could
spend tommorow whipping out 6 pages of QSDS packages and she'd probably buy
them.

Also, just because you seem to be incapable of figuring out FFS2, don't bet
others can't; I was at my VFNSLGS today, and I was chatting with a couple
of kids.  One of them had bought FFS2 the other day, and was enthusing
about how "stone" the system was.  He was 12.

- --

+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~+
|  Douglas E. Berry                 dberry@hooked.net   |
|             http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/            |
|-------------------------------------------------------|
|      Storm the master marathon I'll fly through       |
|      By flash and thunder fire and I'll survive       |
| Then I'll defy the laws of nature and come out alive  |
|                         -Queen, "Seven Seas of Rhye"  |
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~+

  

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1711
***********************************
Traveller-digest      Tuesday, August 19 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1712



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Asia in Traveller
Re: ...artwork (was T4+)
Re: M:E21
Pocket Empires' Careers and Liaison Skill
RE: GDW-Beta
ummm...
RE: T41 Skills Draft A Armorer
Re: M:E21
Re: Question for Marc & a second question
Drive Economics
Re: UNESCO....
Re: FF&S2 Personal Armor
Re: 21st c. Terran technology, Vilani psychology, ...
Re: ARRRRGGGHH!!! Mk. II
Re: 21st c. Terran technology, Vilani psychology, ...
Re: Slow grav vehicles

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 11:02:32 -0400
From: "Peter L. Berghold" <peterb@cyber-wizard.com>
Subject: Re: Asia in Traveller

s.johnson107@genie.com wrote:
> 
> the Queen's English!
>     What about China?  Indonesia?  Africa?  South America?  Where in Traveller
> Canon is the mention of the doubtlessly MASSIVE contribution they made?  I'm

Well,

My old campaign was not *exactly* Canon, but the whole basis to the
campaign was that the reason Terrans got into space in the first place
was due to population pressures on Earth.  As Earth's population
increased into the 500,000,000,000 mark resources and living space got
sparse and folks were shipped off on automated sleepers. 

Hence in my old campaign there were ethnic enclaves, and guess what, the
same ethnic clashes as on earth.


- -- 
PGP Fingerprint = D6 74 56 8E FB 52 4E DD  5C 3F 32 FE AE 1F 1C D0

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%% Peter L. Berghold -- Unix Hacker at Large                          %%
%% TCG -- MIS Department       PHONE: (908) 392-2722                  %%
%% berghold@tcg.com  (work Email) peterb@cyber-wizard.com (play Email)%%
%% "Those who fail to learn from history are condemned to repeat it"  %%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 97 19:27:48 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: ...artwork (was T4+)

On 08/18/97 at 01:41 PM,  Thomas Walter Trelenberg <tomt@scri.fsu.edu>
said:

>**************************
>OTOH, I liked the LBB's and they had NO art at all.  

>Eris
>**************************

>Oh come on Eris.....Don't you remember "Jameson"  in LBB#1?  :-}

That's right!  I stand corrected.

However, if the amount of artwork were limited to a single thumbnail that
would be just fine by me. ;->

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

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 97 19:58:08 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: M:E21

On 08/18/97 at 09:44 PM,  Simon Early <sre@taz.compulink.co.uk> said:

>Don't you think it strange that the transistor was discovered *after*  the
>Roswell/Vilani incident :-)

Far be it for me to throw cold water on our little conspiracy
sub-thread, but the transistor was discovered in the 1920's by some RCA
researchers.  They showed the Administrator of their lab, who told them to
drop that stupid research and get back to what they were getting paid to
do...designing vacuum tubes.  They did.

So, the transistor was only *rediscovered* by Terrans in '47. ;->

Eris,
    or is that all an urban myth. ;->
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 20:54:31 -0400
From: "Paul D. Owensby" <pauld@athens.net>
Subject: Pocket Empires' Careers and Liaison Skill

I was working on adding the two careers in PE to the Beginnings program
and came across a bit of a problem in the career skills tables for both.
Has anyone created any characters that have had the career of Diplomat
or Bureaucrat? Apparently not, because I can't remember having seen 
this asked before, but what is Liaison skill? I mean I know what a Liaison
is, but it isn't a skill from the T4 book and I can't find where it is
defined in
the PE book in terms of game effects. It's listed in the career tables twice,
and has a Int, Soc modifier after it.

Would one of the CORE folks like to post what the definition of Liaison is?
I'm assuming it either got edited out accidentally, or if it *is* in there,
please
tell me where? Thank you!

P.S. While working on these two, I'm having vivid flashbacks to one of the
cartoons in the *old* Dungeon Master's Guide that showed a bunch of 
fantasy types sitting around a table rolling dice while one of them says to
an onlooker "It's called Papers and Paychecks; it's a great new fantasy 
role-playing game. We pretend we're workers and students in an indust-
rialized and technological society." We're finally there :)

**********************************************************
Paul Darius Owensby (pauld@athens.net)                   
ValuJump Lines:"So Economical, You'll Think You're Part of the Crew" (tm)
Pan-Imperia: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/Paul_Owensby/
Home of ValuJump Lines, Pan-Imperia Shipyards, and Beginnings for DOS.

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 13:05:53 +1200
From: Brody  Dunn <brody@intersol.co.nz>
Subject: RE: GDW-Beta

On Tuesday, 19 August 1997 11:34, Douglas E. Berry
[SMTP:dberry@hooked.net] wrote:
> Could someone give me the info on subscribing to GDW-Beta, i seem to have
> los the address..
> 
> Thanks.
> --
> +------------------------------------------------+
> |   Douglas E. Berry         dberry@hooked.net   |
> | Gearhead & Planetologist, Traveller since 1977 |
> |     Inquistor Magnus, Royal Commission for     |
> |               Canon Correctness                |
> |         http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
> |************************************************|
> | "I believe in my heart that all astromoners    |
> |  should be forced to go outside on summer      |
> |  nights, just to admire the sky."  -Carl Sagan |
> +------------------------------------------------+


Try sending a subscription request to gdw-beta@qrc.com

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 21:31:33 -0400 (EDT)
From: GDWGAMES@aol.com
Subject: ummm...

Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1703

> << And do so in only a few hours (*nobody* can fly a fighter longer than
> that, between fatigue and the lack of a bathroom...)>>
> 
>   Oh, quite the contrary. Fighter pilots are fitted with, shall we say
> "equipment," that eliminates the necessity of a latrine in the plane for long
> flights.
> 
>   Mark @ GRG

A device known as "The Motorman's Friend" was sold up until the sixties in
better gas stations everywhere...I imagine it was very similar.

Loren Wiseman
    GDW Emeritus

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 13:29:20 +1200
From: Brody  Dunn <brody@intersol.co.nz>
Subject: RE: T41 Skills Draft A Armorer

Marc answered this question
 
> >> How are you planning to handle the differences in Tech Levels?

With this answer

> > This question applies to Armorer, Mechanic, Gravitics, Electronics,
> > etc. So Fred ((from a LoTech world and with Armorer-3) isn't living
> > in a vacuum...
> > Technology, Training, and Ability
> > Individuals come from a variety of technological backgrounds in the
> > Traveller universe. The abilities conferred by skills are relatively
> > tech level independent. That is to say, a MidTech individual with
> > appropriate skill is skilled in the repair and maintenance of
specific
> > devices. While he might not be able to invent new devices at HiTech
or
> > VHiTech, he probably can puzzle out their maintenance and repair,
> > especially if the appropriate manuals or technical supplies are
> > available.

S.Johnson then said

>     Okay, this makes sense, however it's gonna cost more time the greater the
> distance from the original TL at which the skill was used.  FoEx; A modern
> car
> mechanic can go and fix an old Model-T, these vehicles are legendary for how
> easy this is to do.  But if our car mechanic is used to using diagnostic
> computers and all the other modern equipment he's gonna take a LOT longer to
> figure out how to fix that Model-T.  It's certainly a simplier machine, but
> it's completely different from what our car mechanic is used to dealing with.
> This has economic implications BTW... ;)

And this seems completely correct.  However it then follows on to say
that a person will not be able to get a job if he has not got experience
with skill use at that TL.  Which makes sense to me (and which I've
snipped to save space) and finishes with the following.

> As an Employer you expect a person to have a
> certain level of competence with the task at hand, that's why you hired them!
>     Now for PCs, struggling to handle all the variations in Tech they
>     encounter
> this may work.  It breaks down when it gets applied to the RW STS.
 
To which I say.  Ah ha, an examination of the real world (i.e.
Traveller) will show IMHO that most people will not be traveller's to
any great degree.  Therefore the low tech trained Mechanic would seldom
be called to compete for jobs in a high tech environment (or vice
versa).
However, I think that given a few weeks/months to become familiar with
the resources involved then that mechanic should be able to perform
adequately.

It seems, to me anyway, perfectly reasonable to have a skill like
mechanic that covers all mechanical endeavours of all types, and if
required then a familiarity for a specific TL, or range of TL's, could
be tacked onto the skill (simply listing the TL's the mechanic is
competent in).

It could easily be argued that a mechanic trained in Ford Motorcars
might have significant problems servicing a hovercraft (some have
proiblems servicing Ford Motorcars if mine was anything to go by) but I
think this _way much extremo_ and goes against the Traveller creed.

Thoughts anyone

Brody

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 01:07:42 -0400
From: Eric Freitas <edf@atlantic.net>
Subject: Re: M:E21

At 09:44 PM 8/18/97 +0100, you wrote:
>Don't you think it strange that the transistor was discovered *after* 
>the Roswell/Vilani incident :-)

Nope, just like it doesn't surprise me that the Soviet Union had
energy weapons for ten years before the US's own highly touted
scientists thought they were possible.  ;)

For good reading check out _The Chariots of the Gods_ by Erik Von 
Daniken (sp?).  It is full of great ideas, and "maybe" evidence
for previous high tech societies here on dirt..uh, Earth.

Eric Freitas
edf@atlantic.net

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 02:44:47 +0000 ()
From: kraehe@bakunin.hb.north.de (Michael Koehne)
Subject: Re: Question for Marc & a second question

Moin CardSharks@aol.com,

> Yes they do. They tell how to roll dice and generate characters. The problem
> of players generating an FFFFFF is addressed by the real world laws of
> probability. For a player to generate a character who begins with AAAAAA or
> better is less than 0.002% (maybe 1 in 3 billion). For the other 2 billion
> tries players make, the characters are balanced.

	if you still have a "select dice from a pool" option, its
	still quite easy to have a high stat, or else unbalanced
	character for powergamers. I would advise to spilt the one
	big pool into several smaller ones :

	- Attribute Pool : 12d6 (allows a max of 6 skills)
	- Enlistment, Injury, Commision, Promotion and Continuance
	  either rolled normaly or at referees discretion.
	- Skills Pool : 12d6 per term (allows a max of 6 skills)
	- Mustering out rolled normaly or at referees discretion.

	This would allow some freedom of choice while constraining
	game balance.

By Michael
- -- 
	kraehe@bakunin.north.de		human.is-bremen.de/~kraehe/traveller
		  " ceterum censeo MSDOS esse delendam "

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 19:08:39 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Drive Economics

>You can get quantum tunneling of whole spaceships really easily, if 
>you happen to have an infinite improbability drive fitted ;-)

  Depending on fuel consumption, this could seriously impact
your beverage costing.

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 19:08:48 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: UNESCO....

>Subject: UNESCO develops Jump Drive
>
>Someone said (I get the digest, and I forgot to copy it):
>UNESCO develops Jump Drive

  The original post was caffeine deficient, perhaps :) ;
that's UN Space Coordination Agency.

     Yours truly,
                Steven Hudson,
                        Vancouver, British Columbia

The CT Creed: "There is no Game but Traveller, and High Guard is its' Product"
       
       

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 15:25:17 -0800
From: Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca>
Subject: Re: FF&S2 Personal Armor

>Damn!  I've been waiting for this to get some different armor types
>into T4.  What the heck am I going to do now?

I would suggest checking out the armor design sequence in CSC, but now I
discover armor values have changed AGAIN!

Grrr.

- --
Richard Hough
rdhough@orca.bc.ca

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 21:44:56 -0600
From: lwlguatn@ouray.cudenver.edu (Leroy W.L. Guatney)
Subject: Re: 21st c. Terran technology, Vilani psychology, ...

On Sat, 16 Aug 97 18:51 BST-1
nicklaw@cix.compulink.co.uk (Nicholas Law) writes:
>Subject: Re: 21st c. Terran technology, Vilani psychology, ...
>
>Garry Ward asked, 14 Aug 1997:
>
>> True, they could not build anything larger than a cruiser, but
>> what was theFirst Imperiums tonnage classifications for ships?
>> Supplement 9, fightingships of the Imperium gives us the THIRD
>> Imperium's classifications, butwhat were the FIRST Imperium's? A
>> 3I cruiser could be in the same tonnageclass as a 1I  destroyer.
>
>This was something I had to give some thought to when planning an 
>adventure where the players discover an derelict Vilani warship. 


Hi Nick. :)

<CLASSIC TRAVELLER FLAG=YES>

>In the good old days of yore, ie Book 5 High Guard, there was a 
>tech level limit on the size of computer you could install in a 
>ship, which in turn imposed a limit on the hull size (I know this 
>must all sound unbearably primitive to all you FF&S fans, but such 
>were conditions then). At tech level 11, that of the First 
>Imperium Vilani, the maximum displacement was 50,000 tons, so a 
>1st Imperium dreadnought would be the size of a 3rd Imperium 
>strike cruiser. 


Actually, High Guard says size class P which starts at 50,000 tons,
and extends up to one ton below size class Q (75,000 tons) so the
Vilani could have had up to 74,999 tons.  In my campaign, I always
made the last 100 tons a percentile roll for the players.  They
wanted to do a 1,999 ton ship--they changed their minds when I told
them that 99% of the time, they would be treated as a 2,000 ton
vessel.  They promptly made the ship 1,900 tons. <G>

The caveat must also be added that the assumption here is that the
Vilani had TL11 computers, which matches J-2 drives.  All in all,
the Vilani could have up to 74,900 tons, given the CT constraints,
and some referee input. <G>


>Things were even worse for the Earthmen. At tech level 10, as they 
>were at the start of the Interstellar Wars (recapping briefly for 
>all those who have chosen not to wade through the sixty thousand 
>lines of text devoted to Solomani tech levels that have been 
>posted to the TML) the maximum ship size was 10,000 tons -- those 
>Vilani must have laughed when they saw the pride of Earth's 
>''national squadrons under a tenuous fleet control by UNSCA'' 
>coming for them, forgetting that it's not how big it is that's 
>important, but how you use it.


Andrew's post had the TL10 change taking place at the _end_ of the
FIW (again assuming JumpTech 9/10).  The limit on computers for TL9
is size D, or up to 4,900 tons!  Again, the same caveat for computers
as above for the Vilani.

Notice also that the Terrans had 4,900 ton ships, combined command and
control for the FIW (United Worlds, soon Terran Confederation doesn't
happen until the end of the FIW in -2400).

You also need to point out that in High Guard, the combat differential
mods due to computers is +computer difference (yours-theirs)--Vilani
are plus one (+1) on _all_ HG combat tables, Terrans are minus one (-1)
on _all_ combat tables (that is +2/-2 at the start of the FIW).

Four points:  1) there are a lot of assumptions in this picture
                 (mentioned and not mentioned).

              2) Harold would tell us that the Terrans _must_ be TL9 for
                 T4 to be consistent with CT--(T4 _is_ Traveller).

              3) HIGH GUARD was _not_ gearheading in its earliest form
                 as someone previously claimed, IMO.  (It may have been
                 inspiration, however.)

              4) Questioning slavishly believed dogma is the key to
                 the scientific method.  I love Galileo, he really
                 is a hero (and more so these days).


Thanks for the blast down memory lane. <G>  I just could not resist
chiming in here. <G>


<CLASSIC TRAVELLER FLAG=OFF>

>Nick
>


Leroy Guatney - lwlg@usa.net
 University of Mars, NorthAm Campus
 Class of '98

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 21:09:19 PDT
From: "Charles Li" <chaslimd@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: ARRRRGGGHH!!! Mk. II

>From owner-traveller@phaser.showcase.mpgn.com Mon Aug 18 17:22:45 1997
>Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM 
(8.7.3/8.6.9) with SMTP id PAA29715; Mon, 18 Aug 1997 15:15:55 -0400
>Received: by lists.MPGN.COM (bulk_mailer v1.5); Mon, 18 Aug 1997 
15:15:47 -0400
>Received: (from majordom@localhost) by phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM 
(8.7.3/8.6.9) id PAA29245 for traveller-outgoing; Mon, 18 Aug 1997 
15:03:25 -0400
>Received: from Mithril.MPGN.COM (Mithril.MPGN.COM [206.66.87.8]) by 
phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM (8.7.3/8.6.9) with SMTP id PAA29204 for 
<traveller@Phaser.ShowCase.MPGN.COM>; Mon, 18 Aug 1997 15:01:41 -0400
>Received: from mail2.deltanet.com (mail2.deltanet.com [199.171.190.56]) 
by Mithril.MPGN.COM (8.6.9/8.6.9) with ESMTP id PAA19392 for 
<traveller@MPGN.COM>; Mon, 18 Aug 1997 15:01:40 -0400
>Received: from scott1 (merlin.eviews.com [205.230.201.18])
>	by mail2.deltanet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id MAA26146
>	for <traveller@MPGN.COM>; Mon, 18 Aug 1997 12:01:38 -0700 (PDT)
>Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19970818115733.0081f7a0@mail.deltanet.com>
>X-Sender: fuz@mail.deltanet.com
>X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32)
>Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 11:57:33 -0700
>To: traveller@MPGN.COM
>From: Scott Ellsworth <Scott_Ellsworth@alumni.hmc.edu>
>Subject: Re: ARRRRGGGHH!!! Mk. II
>In-Reply-To: <33F7971A.C22@best.com>
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>Sender: owner-traveller@lists.MPGN.COM
>Reply-To: traveller@MPGN.COM
>
********************  BUZZZZZZZ *******************************
>At 05:28 PM 8/17/97 -0700, you wrote:
>>>FFS2 was stated to be the no-math-barred gearhead design system.  A
>>>developer's tool as it were.  It was never, ever, pitched or talked
>>>about as anything else (here or on the beta list).
>>


..  Like the original Starfire game 
>Marc Miller listens, sometimes, but he does not plan what IG is going to
>do.  Doing that would take him away from the game design that he is clearly
>good at and enjoys.  Blaming the authors of FF&S for inconsistencies in
>previous products is not going to help.  And saying that they should have
>been consistent with one of the previous systems in not really all that
>possible.  IIRC, the system in Starships and Guy's QSDS are both based on
>FF&S, the original, and as a result, this one is going to get results kind
>of like those.  As a result, the old starship design systems are at least
>sort of consistent, and they could not be more so without this boo, or one
>like it.
>
>>ANY BOOK FOR DESIGNING HARDWARE THAT HAS NO SYSTEM FOR USING IT IS A
>>WASTE OF TIME AND MONEY, and only a techno-game-geek locked into their
>>own private litle introverted universe could possibly fail to understand
>>(and hence be offended by) this.
>
>Bullshit.
>
>You either design the results first, and hope to God they make some 
kind of
>sense when you combine them, or you design the design system first, 
make it
>consistent, and then make a combat system that makes them playable.  In the
>ideal case, the public sees neither one before the other is done, and if
>you it the second way, it is a lot easier to play test the combat rules.
>(Since combats need more people to play than design fests, you want to make
>that easier to test.)
>
>To be honest, what I would have done is:
>
>At the same time, cost and spec out FF&S, the Naval/Ground battle book, and
>the Example Designs book.  All three are developed at the same time, and
>the Example designs book is the test suite for the rest of it.  As you
>fiddle with the system, you have a stock set of designs that have to work
>right.
>
>Example Designs consists of a ten page system like QSDS, ten pages of
>combat rules, and sixty pages of ships, tanks, guns, missiles, and so on.
>From the moment you get this, you can be running a game within hour, and be
>done an hour after that.
>
>Eventually, you will want more details, and then FF&S and the Battle Book
>are waiting for you.
>
>You cannot, though, have the simple system without building the complex
>one, because then you end up with exactly the situation you are 
complaining
>about.  A dozen different systems, all with different core assumptions.  A
>starship system that makes no sense when ANYONE with even an idiot's
>conception of science looks at it.  Even an idiot knows that cities die
>when nuked.  If I have nukes as primary staship weapons, then he is going
>to think of blasting a city with one.  What stops him?  Nuclear dampers on
>high tech planets, which is something that a simple system probably does
>not need to cover, because they are big and expensive.
>
>Every potential player of an SF game probably knows enough science to see
>the flaws, so if your game has science in it, you better do it sort of
>right.  By having the complexity available, the science is potentially
>consistent.  Like any SF, you cannot blow suspension of disbelief with
>incosistency.
>
>I am not claiming that the present situation is perfect, or even good, but
>I find it hopeful.  T4 has been out for less than a year, and we now have a
>decent design base.  If they get their thumbs out, continue to support
>adventures like TLWH, and make it a quest to never release a supplement
>with a map-text problem like M0, they have a much better shot.
>
>I really think IG has a process problem - everything they produce suffers
>to a greater or lesser extent from being rushed to market.
>
>Example: FF&S needs the combat system, and both need an approachable system
>for people who are not programmers.  This is obvious to me, and to the
>designers, and everyone else looking.  With FF&S2, they have the
>complicated stuff, and now a simple program can generate tables for
>something like QSDS, and will produce a simple system where you do not need
>to know what a square root is.  The end user does not write the program,
>and should not even know it exists.  Most customers just see a ten page
>ship design system that takes under 15 minutes to navigate, and a ten page
>combat system that is neat and easy to play.
>
>Given the interdependence, you release all three at the same time.  You
>have to release the simple ones and the examples first, or you lose some
>sales, but once the complicated ones are done, why hold on to them.
>Therefore, simultaneous release.
>
>IG gets to sell books full of new and better ships, guns, etc.  They have
>easy fodder for the people who can get the system.  This would have
>required a decent test time, and a decent combat system, which they 
have to
>pony up the money for.  IG does not like doing that.
>
>Standing behind QSDS and putting it on their web site would be an elegant
>solution to the simple design system problem, as then the simple system is
>free for download.  Putting up a five page combat system would work fairly
>well, as then people could "try it out."  If they try that before they get
>the hard rules done, then they end up with inconsistencies JUST like those
>between the vehicle design system and every one of the starship design
>systems, so they better have the hard combat system done before they post
>the easy one.
>
>Scott

I may have been disappointed with the way IG has started producing 
things and the lack of examples provided in FF&S 2 that help new 
Traveller players (who are the future of this game, NOT grognards like 
us), but I cannot condone Jay's continued hammering away at the 
contributors of the list.
   It is unfortunate that IG has allowed the situation to deteriorate, 
and let us not kid ourselves, things are not good for Traveller.  
However, it will only prevail if the dedicated player/enthusiasts of 
this mailing list continue to assure consistency and quality with the 
work they do that goes into future IG products.
   I think Marc Miller's job is formidable NOT impossible, it is 
unfortunate that there aren't veteran hands like Frank Chadwick or Loren 
Wiseman to help with the product line/planning aspects of IG, but we 
must prevail over that if Traveller is to thrive.
   Make no doubt, I'm still on board Traveller and will go down with the 
ship should it happen.
   Let's cease this bickering and move on.  Our game needs us.

Charles

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 23:39:02 -0600
From: lwlguatn@ouray.cudenver.edu (Leroy W.L. Guatney)
Subject: Re: 21st c. Terran technology, Vilani psychology, ...

On Mon Aug 18 21:44:57 1997
I wrote in response to:
>
>On Sat, 16 Aug 97 18:51 BST-1
>nicklaw@cix.compulink.co.uk (Nicholas Law) writes:
>>Subject: Re: 21st c. Terran technology, Vilani psychology, ...
>>
>
><CLASSIC TRAVELLER FLAG=YES>
> [snip]
><CLASSIC TRAVELLER FLAG=OFF>
>

<MEGATRAVELLER FLAG=YES>

I forgot to mention that the same reasoning applies using the MT
ship design and construction rules, since they differed little from
the High Guard rules.  As I see it, I am right on in every thing
I said applying using MT, except that I could never figure out how
the CP (Command Point) thingy worked.  It still works out to ship
sizes.

<G>

<MEGATRAVELLER FLAG=OFF>

I won't even pretend to know any implications of TNE, but that was
70 years after MegaTraveller. B-)


Leroy Guatney - lwlg@usa.net
 University of Mars, NorthAm Campus
 Class of '98

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 08:39:35 +2
From: "RFXn" <mlaakso@utu.fi>
Subject: Re: Slow grav vehicles

On 18 Aug 97 at 10:45, Scott Ellsworth wrote:

> There are two solutions as I see it within the FF&S rules:
> 
> 1.  Put some heplar drives on your vehicles.  My back of the
> envelope designs led me to believe you could make a grav bike with a
> 5G booster that could have a good twenty minutes of booster fuel in
> a reasonable package.
> 
> 2.  Put a 1t thruster plate and a 1t fusion+ plant in.  This means
> the minimum size for a fast, fuel free vehicle is about 5t, when all
> is said and done.
> 
> A third one that is reasonable, but not explicit.
> 
> 3.  Add a new type of drive - the electrically powered fan.  This
> could probably be hacked up from the helicopter rules, and would
> make a good booster for fuel free, undetectable, but slow use.  This
> would probably not push you above mach 1, but might be handy for the
> 110KPH-1000KPH range.

	Most of my light grav vehicle designs (TL11 - TL13) use an MHD 
turbine or a gas turbine for power, coupled to ducted turbofans for 
power. Admittedly, they are not fuel-free but need fossile 
(hydrocarbon) fuel to keep going. But, they're cheap, reliable and 
can be fixed on nearly any planet with reasonable technology. A TL 12 
gravcar (2-seat, 1 disp. ton) has a top speed of around 30kph and 
costs less than Cr 40,000. :)

/RFXn     mlaakso@utu.fi        aka. Matti Laakso
 -Phone: +358-(0)2-237 9928       YO-Kyla 19 A 11
 -IRC: RFXn                       FIN-20540  TURKU
 -Talk: RFXn@delenn.yok.utu.fi    Finland

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1712
***********************************
Traveller-digest      Tuesday, August 19 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1713



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Event Horizon
Re: zero-G beds
Re: OT Private Schools (was Re: Net Illiterate)
Re: Spacefaring nations and economics
PE Addition I'd like to See
Re: FF&S2 Personal Armor
Re:  WHIINNNNE!!! (nee. AAAARGH!!!)
zero-G beds and sleeping
Re: Slow Grav Vehicles
Seat Size in FF&S2
Re: UNESCO....
Re: Ancient Genetic Engineering 
Re: Slow grav vehicles
Re: Net Illiterate
Auction Update #18: RPG Items (AD&D, Space 1889, Traveller)
Re: Asia in Traveller
Re: T41 Skills Draft C Chemistry

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 22:56:05 -0800
From: Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca>
Subject: Re: Event Horizon

>I saw Event Horizon last Friday.
>
>Talk about Traveller looking!!  This pic looked great, and it had a
>lot of Traveller technology.  It's nice to have a high budget movie
>like this so that I can point to it and say to my players, "this is
>what it normally looks like."

Yeesh. I had to specifically tell my players that technology in my campaign
is nothing like what is shown in this movie.

For example, in my campaign unpowered derelict starships cannot remain for
days in a stable orbit inside a gas giant's atmosphere, starship bridges do
not have glass windows which the pilot must watch out of to steer the ship,
starships do not have so many lights on the hull they look like christmas
trees, grav tanks are not designed to dump their occupants and a couple
hundred gallons of fluid onto the floor of the bridge, ship damage is not
repaired by firing automatic spearguns through the ship hull, doors do not
go BANG! so loudly and unexpectedly the crew suffers permanent hearing
loss, in an emergency the normal ships lights do not go out and strobe
lights start flashing all over the place nor does the life support sytem
start pumping out dry ice smoke, bulkheads do not have huge teeth on the
entryways, airlocks do not require a long vocal countdown before opening,
engine rooms have seats and control panels instead of giant spikes all over
the place, corridors do not have revolving 'fun house' walls, the ship's
drive is not a giant rotating armillary sphere with headlights stuck all
over it, starships are not built of Volatile Steel (TM) which
chain-detonates when a satchel charge is set off inside the ship. Also,
jump space is not you-know-what.

>The look of the film is incredible--one of the best sci-fi looking
>movies I've seen in a long time.  It's done in the tradition of
>Alien, Blade Runner, and Outland, so everything looks dirty,
>functional, and real.

Yup, incredible (def. "not credible") is the word for it. In the tradition
of other high-budget SF films, everything looks like a soundstage for a
music video.

- --
Richard Hough
rdhough@orca.bc.ca

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 22:08:57 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Re: zero-G beds

Paul D. Owensby wrote

[snip]

> In addition, physical fatigue would be reduced greatly by just having what-
> ever internal gravity there may be switched off. 

> This is a reason the staterooms on my ship plans tend to be smaller than the
> usual design, I don't include beds in my deckplans. I can't imagine any 
> culture that has gravitic control as an everyday fact of life not having 
> zero g beds as the norm while planet side.

What about the negative medical effects of zero gravity.  Do you think
it would be a good idea to have zero gravity beds everywhere ? 
Cannonically Traveller has (at TL 9) anti bone degeneration drugs
(mentioned in CT's Beltstrike IIRC) but if everyone is using zero
gravity beds they may need to be taking this drug.

On the other hand it is quite possible that 8 hours a day of zero G has
none of the negative effects that 24 hours a day zero gravity does.

In addition their are certain other activities one can do in bed that
may be somewhat more difficult in zero gravity as the participants may
have difficulty remaining in contact.  I have heard rumors that certain
space shuttle astronauts might have a first hand answer to this
question, can anyone out there confirm this ?

How about simply using gravity control to move the bed into the ceiling
when it is not in use and letting it descend when needed.

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 22:24:04 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Re: OT Private Schools (was Re: Net Illiterate)

Bruce Johnson wrote 

> Private schools work because A) they can accept, deny or kick out _anyone_
> they want for _any_ reason they want, and b) they typically spend a _hell_
> of a lot more per student than public schools.

Bruce private schools spend normally spend less per student, often a
_lot_ less, than public schools do. The primary reasons they can do so
are that they do not have to take everyone and that they spend alot less
on administration.  (Unless you mean universities rather than schools.) 
I think you got it right on target with reason A) however.  

Non Americans (especially British) should be aware that Americans mean
publically (government) funded when they say public schools and
privately funded (paid by the students family) when we say private
schools.

> Sorry, the rant is _completely_ off topic, I'll return you now to the
> "Foss art destroyed IG by making them use gearheads to write FFS2 with
> Bic NearC Virocks" flame now in progress.

But anything can be brought on topic if we try hard enough.

How about:

Boarding Schools as Institutes of Social Change:  An Examination of
Upper Class Sylean Schooling Pattern between -50 and 100 as the title of
your Eductional Sociology major Academic player charecters Doctoral
thesis. :)

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 08:38:55 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Tommy Grav <tommy.grav@astro.uio.no>
Subject: Re: Spacefaring nations and economics

On Mon, 18 Aug 1997, Nick Munn wrote:

> > Egypt is never going to be a member of the EU, but the palistinian might
> > if they are accepted into the Commonwealth. Isreal is also a much more
> > natural candidate than Egypt, IMHO.
> 
> For space travel, sure.  For EU membership, I don't think so.
> 

I don't agree. Israel is part of Europe whan it comes to sports 
and so on. It might very well become a candidate for the EU. 

> 
> Nick
> 

Tommy Grav                  tommy.grav@astro.uio.no    
Institute of Astrophysics   http://www.uio.no/~tommygr/
University in Oslo          "If you value your lives, be somwhere 
Norway                       else!" - Ambassador Delenn B5 

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

Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 07:32:32 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
Subject: PE Addition I'd like to See

Here's a PE addition I'd like to see...

I think that PE could be made even more useful for Traveller referees 
and players if there was a section in it for using the supplement on 
one world in any melieu.

Right now, one of my PC's, a Baron from the planet Tureded in the 
Spinward Marches, is thinking of returning home and uniting his 
world.

I'll probably adapt PE to be used in that way--but I thought it would 
 be nice for the PE people on this list to come up with some rules 
for governing an entire planet INSIDE the Imperium, not empire build.

I'd like to see rules for interaction with other planets, Imperial 
taxes as a strain on world economy, trade coalitions, etc,--every 
thing that it would take to run a world as a member of the Imperium.

This would make a nice later expansion for PE.  Maybe they could hook 
it in with the upcoming Nobles allowing for PC planetary leaders to 
become big wigs in the Imperial court--maybe even Emperor one day.

....just thinking ahead.

Kenneth.

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

Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 07:32:31 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: FF&S2 Personal Armor

> >Damn!  I've been waiting for this to get some different armor types
> >into T4.  What the heck am I going to do now?
> 
> I would suggest checking out the armor design sequence in CSC, but now I
> discover armor values have changed AGAIN!

Yes, I tried that, but they are specific to vehicle type armors--not 
personal armor.  You've got to make a lot of assumptions and do a lot 
of stretching to come up with personal armor numbers using that 
system.

Why can't IG just put in a few paragraphs somewhere in some 
supplement the AVs for the standard Traveller armor types we've had 
since the game was established--Cloth, Combat Armor, etc?

The MT Armor types are pretty close to T4's, but they get a little 
stiff at the high end.  I mean, sheeeesh!  AV 18 for high tech Battle 
Dress?

Yet Mesh is AV2, just like in T4, and a Flak Jacket is AV3, just like 
the CSC description of Flex (describing it to be your standard 
ballistic cloth covering).

I guess I'll keep using MT AV's until I can find something better.  

It sure is keeping the PC's alive this way.

Kenneth.

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 15:34:32 +0800
From: Michael Bailey <mickb@opera.iinet.net.au>
Subject: Re:  WHIINNNNE!!! (nee. AAAARGH!!!)

I'm trying to stay on the good-side of losing my temper here, but I'll only
take so many insults before I feel compelled to respond...


So, maybe I do qualify as a geek-boy gearhead, living in my own introverted
universe....but I don't think so, and even if I do, I resent being called
as much.  Personally, I divide my time between 'moronic anal-retentive
gearheadism' and character/culture/prose description.

Let's face it, one of Traveller's main attractions has always been it's
technical side...that, plus the background are what (IMHO) what makes the
game so good...the gearheads can to their thing, the prose/culture freaks
can do theirs, and a great synergy results.  Traveller has appeal at both
ends of the spectrum, something that not many (if any) other games have.

If you don't like it, fine - you live in a free country, you can like what
you want...but you stepped over the line from constructive criticism into,
frankly, childish whining.  It's fine not to like the results of someone's
labour - it's quite another thing to insult them and dismiss them as
worthless because they don't share your (somewhat narrow) viewpoint.

That's my last word on the subject...flames will be pointedly ignored.


Michael T. Bailey (mickb@opera.iinet.net.au)

"You drive", he said, "I think there's something wrong with me"
			Hunter S. Thompson - 'Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas'

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 09:16:24 +0100
From: Timothy.Collinson@solent.ac.uk
Subject: zero-G beds and sleeping

Paul Owensby wrote:

>This is a reason the staterooms on my ship plans tend to be smaller than
the
>usual design, I don't include beds in my deckplans. I can't imagine any
>culture that has gravitic control as an everyday fact of life not having
>zero g beds as the norm while planet side. Using this as a given (in my
Surely there would be people who just weren't comfortable with that.
(However prevalent gravitic control might be).  Or, indeed, can't/won't
afford it.  Indeed there may be people who prefer *more* gravity for
sleeping (or whatever) and are going to want specialised mattresses to
support them.



>campaign, at least), I can see absolutely no reason to wasted valuable
>shipboard space on anything more complex than a containment system

My *impression* in Traveller has never been of space being at a particular
premium.  Perhaps I'm wrong but I've kind of assumed that even if starships
don't have quite the space of the, say, Enterprise, they still have a fair
bit of room for those long weeks in jumpspace not to feel claustrophobic.


>(i.e. net) attached to the wall to hold you in place, or at most a type of
>closet/cubby like some of the shuttle folks sleep in now.


I'm sure some will love that - others might loathe it.  I suspect
passengers will demand the choice.  Ship captains (or designers) will
provide it.


tc
timothy.collinson@solent.ac.uk

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 01:25:34 -0700 (PDT)
From: "John R. Snead" <jsnead@netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Slow Grav Vehicles

I've designed several 3 displacement ton (42 m^3) thruster powered
vehicles.  They are small, a bit cramped, but quite possible, and 
they *really* move.  Such craft are the size of a large van or small
motor home and can get you to Jupiter in a few days (less if you toss out 
a few seats and add in more grav compensation).  I'd imagine 3-5 disp ton   
thruster buggies would be pretty popular among the wealthy, much like a 
personal helicopter or a Learjet is now.  


- -John Snead jsnead@netcom.com

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 01:31:49 -0700 (PDT)
From: "John R. Snead" <jsnead@netcom.com>
Subject: Seat Size in FF&S2

In Table 207 in FF&S2 seats are now back to 1.5 m^3 at the minimum and
2.5-3.5 m^2 for normal seats.  From doing some measurements I've done on cars
the 1-2 m^3 in CSC makes much more sense.  Why the change in FF&S2?  
3.5 m^3 for a normal seat or any workstation is a whole hell of a lot of 
space.  Cars and private planes simply do not have or need this amount of 
space and I can't see any reason why an air raft would need it either.

Anyone else have reasons?


- -John Snead jsnead@netcom.com

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 05:06:46 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: Re: UNESCO....

Steven Hudson writes: 

>>Someone said (I get the digest, and I forgot to copy it):
>>UNESCO develops Jump Drive
>
>  The original post was caffeine deficient, perhaps :) ;
>that's UN Space Coordination Agency.

   It is indeed UNSCA *not* UNESCO.  I've spoken personally with the
gentleman who made the original error and made sure he had a sufficent
caffeine fix for next time.

   Diet Mountain Dew anyone?  :-)

Regards,

Harold

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 10:33:57 +0100
From: Stewart Eyres <spe@astro.keele.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Ancient Genetic Engineering 

>In addition we know that minor races do not have better aging saves than
>Solomani.  If they had had genetic problems snipped out they should
>either receive a + to aging rolls, a + to their Endurance stats, or
>both.

The only minor race with a separate write-up to that level of detail
are the Darrians, I think - and they are inter-bred with the Solomani.
The Vilani *do* have radically different aging rules.  I don't think
we know about the other human minor races.

Stewart Eyres <spe@astro.keele.ac.uk>

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 14:06:37 +2
From: "RFXn" <mlaakso@utu.fi>
Subject: Re: Slow grav vehicles

On 19 Aug 97 at 8:39, RFXn wrote:

>  Most of my light grav vehicle designs (TL11 - TL13) use an MHD
> turbine or a gas turbine for power, coupled to ducted turbofans for
> power.
  ^^^^^

.... was supposed to be "propulsion". Sorry.

/RFXn     mlaakso@utu.fi        aka. Matti Laakso
 -Phone: +358-(0)2-237 9928       YO-Kyla 19 A 11
 -IRC: RFXn                       FIN-20540  TURKU
 -Talk: RFXn@delenn.yok.utu.fi    Finland

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 07:10:28 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: Re: Net Illiterate

Bruce Johnson writes:

>Whoa whoa whoa there! Ebonics was 'recognized' under some highly
>misunderstood guidelines in ONE, (1) school district, Oakland CA.
>
>What it _is_ is a clearly recognizable dialect, with distinct rules and
>grammar. Ask the linguists who actually study it.

   <snip>

   We agree on Ebonics, however...

>It's right up there in misinformation whith the current twits in Cingress
>all up in arms because the US refuses to destroy the public school system
>infavor of private ones. They had some dumba** congresscritter up spouting
>about how "All Amurrican children deserve the chances that Chelsea Clinton
>has..."
>
>Why yes, they do, if you can put up the tutition required yearly that the
>Clintons pay out of their own pocket..duh! But handing money from the
>public funds to pay for private schools is government subsidy,
>nothing less, something that these stupid Republicans are too blind to see
>if it bites them on the a**.

   In your humble opinion of course.  Look, if you insist on wasting
bandwidth on bullsh*t NEA propaganda, do it somewhere else.  Your
comments are insulting and accomplish even less than the quote from the
Hitler speak on gun control last week.

- --Harold

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 07:23:24 -0400
From: Kevin Combs <KCOMBS@mdems.ab.umd.edu>
Subject: Auction Update #18: RPG Items (AD&D, Space 1889, Traveller)

Rules:   Update 8/19/97  -  07:00 EDT         

Please check to see if you have won any items in this auction.

If so and you are not bidding on anything else, please
email me your smail address along with a list of the items
won and I can get a postage amount.

If so and you are still bidding on other items, please
continue and email the above info when the bidding stops.

1. Bids in US dollars. Minimum bid is listed. Bid in $.50 
increments for items under $10. $1.00 increments over $10.

2. Buyout offers will be considered.

3. Buyer pays shipping.

4. I prefer money orders, but I will take checks. I will 
hold items for one week so checks can clear my bank.  All 
checks must be drawn on a U.S. bank and in U.S. currency.

5. I reserve the right to pull any item for any reason. 

6. This auction will be updated every day.

7. The going x1, going x2, gone process will be used after
the first 10 days of the auction. Items will upgraded to 
the next level every two days when no bids are recieved.

8. Send all bids to kevin013@earthlink.net.

9. The following conditions will be used:   
    (MN) Item is perfect.
    (UP) Complete with the counters unpunched.
    (Ex) This item has been used/read, with minor marks.
    (PU) Complete with counters punched.  I do not know if 
         all counters are present.
    Some other comments regarding condition are noted as needed.  

Traveller Related Items
GDW     Fifth Frontier War (Box has some scuff    
        marks and is slightly pushed in)
        $55.00 rbeck@iquest.net (8/18) going x1
        $50.00 pnewman@alaska.net 
        $45.00 DMoody@bridge.com 

DGP     101 Vehicles                              
        $ 9.00 mark.samuels@questintl.com  gone

DGP     Referee's Gaming Kit                      
        Buyout - $12.00 - gone

DGP     Starship Operator's Manual                
        $16.00 gmgoffin@pacbell.net gone
        
GDW     Azhanti High Lightning (50% unpunched     
        does not have the tech manual or combat
        chart)
        Buyout - $40.00 - gone
        
Judge's 
Guild   Doom of the Singing Star                  MN  
        $ 6.50 efh@student.umass.edu - gone
                
Judge's 
Guild   Starships & Spacecraft                    MN  
        $ 5.50 efh@student.umass.edu gone

Martian 
Metals  15mm Traveller Figures (217 painted &     
        mounted 15mm Traveller figures.  Figure
        types includes Kree, Humanoid, Vargr, 
        Zhodani, Droyne, Robots and others.  Large  
        variety of posses, weapons, and clothing.  
        Also included is a 15mm 2-seat hovercraft 
        and 10 15mm Star Wars painted figures.  A
        total of 228 painted figures.)
        Buyout - $150.00 - gone!
        

AD&D Related Items                                Co     

TSR     Keep on the Borderlands                   Ex  
        $ 5.00 JaseHawkw@worldnet.att.net (8/14) going x2

TSR     Dragonlance Saga Book One                 Ex 
        $ 4.00 saveall@together.net (8/15) going x2

TSR     Art of the Dragonlance Saga               Ex  
        $11.00 stephan.Lange@iwf-mt.tu-berlin.de gone
        $10.00 BFireforge@aol.com

TSR     World of Krynn Trail Map                  
        $16.00 stephan.Lange@iwf-mt.tu-berlin.de gone
        $15.00 BFireforge@aol.com 

TSR     Al-Qadim Rulebook (slight cover tear)     Ex  
        $ 3.00 pblood@transbay.net gone
           
TSR     Atlas of the Dragonlance World            Ex
        $12.00 jhascher@gte.net gone
        
TSR     Castle Greyhawk                           
        $17.00 EugHarvey@aol.com gone
        $16.00 tarquin@ro.com 
        
TSR     DL 1 - Dragons of Despair                 Ex  $ 3.00
TSR     DL 2 - Dragons of Flame                   Ex  $ 3.00
TSR     DL 5 - Dragons of Mystery                 Ex  $ 3.00
TSR     DL 6 - Dragons of Ice                     Ex  $ 3.00
TSR     DL 7 - Dragons of Light                   Ex  $ 3.00
TSR     DL 8 - Dragons of War                     Ex  $ 3.00
TSR     DL 9 - Dragons of Deceit                  Ex  $ 3.00
TSR     DL10 - Dragons of Dreams                  Ex  $ 3.00

TSR     Dragonlance Classics Vol I                Ex  
        $ 8.00 lazascan@aol.com gone

TSR     Gnomes - 100, Dragons - 0                 Ex  $ 3.00
        $ 5.00 jhascher@gte.net gone
        $ 4.00 lazascan@aol.com 

TSR     Leaves from the Inn of the Last Home      Ex  $ 3.00


Space 1889 Related Items
GDW     Cloudships and Gunboats                   
        $ 4.50 pnewman@alaska.net (8/14) going x2
        $ 4.00 Thorinn3@aol.com 
        $ 3.00 jlong@wilmington.net 

GDW     Legions of Mars (21 - 25mm unpainted      
        figures)
        $17.00 rfields@actrix.gen.nz (8/14) going x2
        $15.00 DMoody@bridge.com 
        $12.00 rfields@actrix.gen.nz
        
GDW     Soldier's Companion                                  Ex
        $17.00 rbeck@iquest.net (8/15) going x2
        $15.00 DMoody@bridge.com 
        $11.00 Thorinn3@aol.com
        $10.00 egc@northnet.org 

GDW     Victorian Adventurers (10 - 25mm          
        unpainted figures)
        $20.00 ggm1201@dmacc.cc.ia.us (8/14) going x2
        $16.00 cgriffen@cisco.com 
        $16.00 rfields@actrix.gen.nz
                        
GDW     Sky Galleons of Mars (also includes a     
        copy of Cloudships & Gunboats)
        $20.00 DMoody@bridge.com    gone
        $17.00 pnewman@alaska.net
        $16.00 Thorinn3@aol.com 
        $15.00 terrell_scoggins@bigfoot.com 

GDW     Canal Priests of Mars                     
        $ 6.00 Thorinn3@aol.com gone
                
GDW     Caravans of Mars                          
        $ 5.50 gmgoffin@pacbell.net gone
                
GDW     Cloud Captains of Mars                    
        $ 7.00 terrell_scoggins@bigfoot.com gone
        $ 6.00 pnewman@alaska.net 
        
GDW     Conklin's Atlas of the World              
        $ 6.00 terrell_scoggins@bigfoot.com gone
                
GDW     Ironclads & Ether Flyers                  
        $ 8.00 terrell_scoggins@bigfoot.com gone
                
GDW     More Tales from the Ether                 
        $ 7.00 terrell_scoggins@bigfoot.com gone
        
GDW     Referee's Screen                          
        $ 4.00 pnewman@alaska.net gone
        $ 3.00 jlong@wilmington.net
        $ 3.00 pnewman@alaska.net

GDW     Space 1889 Rule Book (Hardback)           
        $ 8.00 terrell_scoggins@bigfoot.com gone
        $ 5.00 jlong@wilmington.net

GDW     Steppelords of Mars                       
        $ 4.00 pnewman@alaska.net gone
        $ 3.00 jlong@wilmington.net

GDW     Tales from the Ether (some cover marks)   
        $ 3.00 jlong@wilmington.net gone

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 13:03:28 +0100
From: "Nick Munn" <N.S.Munn@sheffield.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Asia in Traveller

One thought: if Asian countries were numerically under-represented in 
the highly-technological Terran Confederation Navy then they would be 
less prominent in the Second and Third Imperia.

However, when the Terrans reached Diaspora sector, they shipped huge 
numbers of colonists to secure the planets as bases etc..  Many of 
these might have come from the populous Asian cultures.

Nick
 

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 12:57:38 +0100
From: "Nick Munn" <N.S.Munn@sheffield.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: T41 Skills Draft C Chemistry

CardSharks@aol.com writes:

> Nick.
> 
> Your well-stated evaluation of Chemistry is just what I was looking for. You
> don't happen to have similar expertise in Geology, Psychology, History, etc?

No smiley at the end of the sentence, OK, it's a serious question.  
It gets a serious answer:

I couldn't claim to have such a strong background in any of the 
above, but I do have some kind of overview of them.  (Also some 
courses in Earth Sciences, knew a couple of geologists, interested in 
Jung's psychology and historically literate.)

My take on these sciences in Traveller would be:


Geology

The study of the materials which make up a world.  This includes 
knowledge of rocks and minerals in a world's crust, an understanding 
of the formation and internal structure of worlds, and the ability to 
make deductions based upon geological information.  Geology is not 
limited to Earth-like planets, but is commonly applied to icy worlds 
and asteroid belts alike.

Learning of Geology is initially classroom based, with a strong 
practical component, but includes a large proportion of fieldwork.  A 
graduate of the University of Sylea (Geology-3) might expect to have 
experience of several mainworlds, at least one asteroid belt and 
perhaps one "unusual" world with severe vulcanism or a number of 
interesting minerals.

Analysis: (tasks as for Chemistry)

The analysis of rock samples shares many techniques with Chemistry, 
the difference being that Geology is more attuned to discovering the 
structure of naturally-occurring, predominantly inorganic compounds.

Geological analysis on the larger scale may be used to determine the 
fault lines between plates, likelhood of volcanic eruptions and the 
like, as well as more mundane applications such as determining 
geologically stable sites for waste disposal or mining.

Predictive use of Geology is complex, a typical task being to 
determine whether lanthanum ores may be present in a region, given 
the known rock structures and compositions.  A good Geologist is a 
must for any serious exploration team.

Equipment bonuses: +1 to +6; most rock samples are quite easily 
analysed, and complex problems require both expensive tools and 
considerable computer power.



Psychology

Psychology is the study of what motivates a sentient being at the 
personal level.  This includes social factors and sometimes also 
assumptions about "universal human nature"; the latter are somewhat 
contentious but often produce very accurate models of behaviour.

In an interstellar society, Psychology includes the ability to adapt 
to other people's way of thinking, despite cultural differences.

The practical uses of Psychology skill are many and varied.  Most 
tasks using Psychology will be Uncertain due to the subtleties of 
interpersonal communication.

Assess mood of crowd, Psychology + Int > Easy

Determine underlying attitude of official, Psychology + Int
 (uncertain)

Detect impostor or spy, Psychology + Soc or Int, Difficult, uncertain
 [maybe an opposed task vs. Disguise or Psych?]


Tasks are typically one level harder when applied to an alien culture 
(including some "exotic" human culures) and one level easier for a 
culture the psychologist knows well.  Resistance or evasion may make 
tasks harder (if undetected) and active cooperation will decrease the 
difficulty one level.



History

History deals with the actions of whole societies, in much the same 
way as Psychology deals with individual motivations.  While the study 
of history is focussed on past events, the skills of a historian can 
be applied to interpret or even predict events in the present day.

History skill reflects the ability of a character to find and 
understand the social and economic factors behind a situation, past 
or present, as well as a broad overview of history as a whole and 
detailed knowledge of one period or culture.


Example uses:

Assess local law/government level

Assess political situation

Determine likely source of local unrest (e.g. whether a new factory 
 is to blame for striking workers)

Recall historical analogy to present day

Manipulate government


Understanding societies in both personal and social aspects is 
difficult, and those with History-4+ and Psychology-4+ are known as 
Psycho-Historians.


Nick
Dr. Nick Munn, Dept. of Information Studies, University of Sheffield
Tel. (0)114 222 2673, email n.s.munn@sheffield.ac.uk

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1713
***********************************
Traveller-digest      Tuesday, August 19 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1714



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Is the Kinunir a Cruiser?
Re: Spacefaring nations and economics
Re: E21 Chronology
Brawling vs Martial Arts skill
Re: GDW-Beta
Re: T41 Skills Draft C Chemistry
Re: Pocket Empires' Careers and Liaison Skill
Re: T41 Skills Draft A Armorer
Trader skill vs Broker skill
Stutterwarp & Heisenberg revisited once again ...
Family Aircar (TL10)
Sports Car (TL10)
Re: zero-G beds
Re: UNESCO....
Swamp Raider (TL8)
Re: Brawling vs Martial Arts skill

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 13:48:06 +0100
From: "J." <Jonathan@hccm.co.uk>
Subject: Is the Kinunir a Cruiser?

I was reading CT adventure 1 last night, and noticed that the Kinunir class
ship was called a colonial crusier (or battle cruiser), but it is only 1200 tons.
Most other cruiser ships I can find are in the region of 50,000 to 100,000 tons
(mostly from MT books). It's smaller than most escort class ships.

So what class to ship is it?

Also the Close Escort ship (in the Imperial Encyclopedia) is far smaller than
the Escort ships published for MegaTraveller.

There's probably some good reason for this.(I guess it's something to do with
the different design methods in CT and MT.) But I have always had trouble
coming up with a reason why the Kinunir is classed as a cruiser.

Anybody got any good ideas on this?

J.

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 14:16:31 +0100
From: "Nick Munn" <N.S.Munn@sheffield.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Spacefaring nations and economics

Tommy Grav <tommy.grav@astro.uio.no>: 

> On Mon, 18 Aug 1997, Nick Munn wrote:

[Re Israel}

> > For space travel, sure.  For EU membership, I don't think so.
> 
> I don't agree. Israel is part of Europe whan it comes to sports 
> and so on. It might very well become a candidate for the EU. 

Israel won't accept EU immigration rules, for a start:  Moslem 
influence in Europe is increasing and if Turkey joined the EU for 
instance that would be a real barrier.  I can also see problems with 
defence, presence of certain other nations (British backed 
Palestinians in 1948, Germans somewhat tainted by WW2, many Austrians 
*still* anti-Semitic by all accounts, pogroms by Slavs, etc.)

Israel might well be a good candidate but I can't see it being other 
than militantly isolationist.

Nick
Dr. Nick Munn, Dept. of Information Studies, University of Sheffield
Tel. (0)114 222 2673, email n.s.munn@sheffield.ac.uk

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 15:28:32 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: E21 Chronology

Harold Hale writes:
>Leroy William Lu Guatney writes:
>>Why do you want to change this date from the above?
> 
>   Anyone who thinks that there will be a level of international
>cooperation enough within the next 12 years to establish UNSCA isn't
>living on the same Earth I am.  Same for the establishment of Archimedes
>settlement (from a writeup that is 13 years old).  Far too optimistic
>given the current status of Earth's various space programs.

Very true, but...
 
>A revision of some of the dates for Terran exploration and "conquest" of 
>the Solar system are badly needed in light of a more modest space tech 
>development schedule and more realistic budgetary projections.

IMO it would be much better just to realize that the Traveller universe is
not identical to our universe and to simply stick to one timeline once it
is established. As far as I'm concerned I don't mind gaming in a universe
where, say, computers didn't develop as explosively as they have done in
our universe in the past 20 years. Or, in casu, space exploration and
international cooperation developed much faster than it really did.

About seven years ago I started a time travel campaign based in the 27th
Century (loosely based on Simon Hawke's Time Wars books) and one thing I
did was to issue my players a timeline covering events from 1990 to 2610
(Cribbed from, among other things, T2300 and GURPS Terradyne). When I did
some more work on that timeline a couple of years ago, I added the entry:

1990	Game universe begins deviating from the real universe in a major
	way!

Let's do that with Traveller. Otherwise we'll have to keep revising the
timeline and the tech definitions as the real Earth develop in ways we
didn't anticipate (and I guarantee you that it will ;-).



      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 08:03:22 -0600
From: Erwin Fritz <efritz@glja.com>
Subject: Brawling vs Martial Arts skill

Okay, so Brawling is defined as the ability to fight, without having
had training, in hand-to-hand combat. It may involve the use of nearby
objects as weapons (bottles, rocks, etc.).

A Martial Arts skill would, of course, involve considerable training.
A user of this skill would also be able to use nearby objects as 
weapons.

In my campaign I use Brawling because MT has no Martial Arts skill.
However, I'm willing to introduce MA if it makes sense.

My question is this: what are the effects of having two different
skills for these abilities in combat? Is there a situation where
Brawling-2 is better or worse than MA-2?

I'm speaking about Traveller tasks, not real life. As a practitioner
of Jiu-Jitsu, I'm aware of the differences between a decent martial
arts ability and a decent bar fighting ability. These differences
don't seem to translate down to the Traveller combat rules in 
CT and MT. 

If someone can come up with the difference between Brawling and
Martial Arts as that difference applies to the combat rules, I'd
appreciate it.

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

Date: 19 Aug 1997 14:37:03 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: GDW-Beta

>Try sending a subscription request to gdw-beta@qrc.com

I did that, and I got a bounced message.  Does the listadmin have a public
address?

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 15:40:22 +0100
From: John_Wood@cbtsys.com
Subject: Re: T41 Skills Draft C Chemistry

Re: History

History deals with the actions of whole societies, in much the same
way as Psychology deals with individual motivations.  While the study
of history is focussed on past events, the skills of a historian can
be applied to interpret or even predict events in the present day.

History skill reflects the ability of a character to find and
understand the social and economic factors behind a situation, past
or present, as well as a broad overview of history as a whole and
detailed knowledge of one period or culture.


Example uses:

Assess local law/government level

Assess political situation

Determine likely source of local unrest (e.g. whether a new factory
 is to blame for striking workers)

Recall historical analogy to present day

Manipulate government


Understanding societies in both personal and social aspects is
difficult, and those with History-4+ and Psychology-4+ are known as
Psycho-Historians.


As a history graduate I'd like to propose some amendments to the history
skill proffered by Nick, principally I'd warn against combining history and
psychohistory skills in such a matter of fact way. The psychological
comparison of societies and individuals is a useful analogy that falls over
quite quickly when applied too earnestly.  I imagine that psychohistory (in
the sci fi/dune sense) requires knowledge much more in the domain of the
mass media specialist. The psychohistorical 'skills' available to the
ordinary history graduate or postgraduate relate to the psychological
analysis of the motives of historical individuals, not to the manipulation
of countless billions of contemporaries. So I'd remove that 'manipulate
government' section.

I'd define history as:

A body of knowledge concerned with the recording, study, and critical
analysis of past events through contemporaneous recorded testimony in
written, oral, and other forms. Characters may have specific knowledge of a
particular period, race, or society or they may have studied history
thematically, for instance concentrating on economics, politics, social
history, the history of science and technology etc.

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 11:01:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Pocket Empires' Careers and Liaison Skill

In a message dated 97-08-19 00:54:37 EDT, you write:

<< 
 Would one of the CORE folks like to post what the definition of Liaison is?
 I'm assuming it either got edited out accidentally, or if it *is* in there,
 please
 tell me where? Thank you!
  >>

I am posting skills from T41 alphabetically, and I haven't gotten to L yet.

But

	Liaison, Admin, Carousing, Diplomacy, and Streetwise are related skills.
Carousing is the skill of meeting people and enjoying their company. Admin is
the skill of working within an organization. Liaison is the skill of
coordinating relationships between different cultures or organizations.
Diplomacy is the formal skill of negotiation between governments. Streetwise
is the skill of dealing with local subcultures without alienating them.

Marc

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 11:02:11 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: T41 Skills Draft A Armorer

In a message dated 97-08-19 01:16:00 EDT, you write:

<< 
 It seems, to me anyway, perfectly reasonable to have a skill like
 mechanic that covers all mechanical endeavours of all types, and if
 required then a familiarity for a specific TL, or range of TL's, could
 be tacked onto the skill (simply listing the TL's the mechanic is
 competent in).

First, I think that mandating a TL aspect of "Mechanic" or some such would
make the game more inaccessible with little gain otherwise. For game masters
who care to, they can impose such additional realism. In any case, most
people don't move between tech levels (real world that is). When they do
(immigrants move up; missionaries move down) we find there are universal
skill aspects, and TL dependent aspects. I think a lot of mechanics (for
example) are working at the edge of their competency and really have skill in
"Use of Ford diagnostic computers" rather than in "Mechanics"

 Marc

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 08:28:22 -0600
From: Erwin Fritz <efritz@glja.com>
Subject: Trader skill vs Broker skill

Could some kind soul explain the difference between these
two skills? I'm playing MT but have seen both. Explanations involving
other versions of Traveller are welcome too. 

I may just combine the two into one if I can't come up with a
justification for having them separate.

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 11:02:48 -0400
From: Andy Brick <exeus@compuserve.com>
Subject: Stutterwarp & Heisenberg revisited once again ...

Hi All,

Some time ago, Garry Ward wrote -

> This approach sounds rather more like the Keyhole drives from =
> FF&S1, only instead of wormholes light years long, lots of =
> little ones exist that ships can drop thru under the proper =
> conditions. Handly explains why some deep system probes have =
> simply disappeared enroute to Mars and beyond. =


Whoah ! What deep system probes have disappeared ?

> Fields that induce all electrons in the human body to all head in the same
> direction at the same time tend to result in death by electrocution, dont they?

We aren't causing current flow - to do that, we would displace only the
the charge carrying electrons in the field. Rather, we are displacing
everything, and so there is no net electrical potential.

> In standard 2300AD setting; which I do not use.

It's the same explanation as FF&S1 and hence part of the alternative tech=
Traveller "pseudo-canon". There's no mention of anything in common between
Jump and Stutterwarp other than they are both FTL Drives !

> True; basic principle is Gravitically Induced Space Time Displacement;
> implementation, Macro version, is Jump, implementation, Micro version is
> Stutter Warp. Just like aerodynamics, same rules, different implementation
> methods.

I think I am repeating myself here, but Jump is travel through an alternative
space time called Jump Space, whereas Stutterwarp is analogous to electron
tunnelling on the macro scale. I don't see how the "rules" are the same.

> Scecrets of the Ancients did not say that Grandfather had created Black
> Holes, but that he expended huge quantities of energy to 'pinch' off section
> of space time for his teleportation networks and STARSHIPS (page 31,
> Adventure 12). My opinon is that Jump Drives, Stutter Warp Drives, Gravitic
> based Thruster Plates and such depend on finding a means and a material that
> will create a ARTIFICAL gravitational signiture such that space time is
> distorted in a controlled way, AS IF a mass existed, to produce the effects
> for which each of these devices is noted. =

True, to a point. Yes, Traveller does have artificial gravitational fields.
Yes, they do not require mass. However, nowhere does it imply that Jump Drives
are gravitic devices, merely that they are affected by gravitational fields.
And Stutterwarp is definately not a gravitic device - in 2300AD canon, there
is no science of gravitics, and stutterwarp drives exist quite happily. Since
TNE / FF&S1 lifted Stutterwarp from 2300AD, then I assume the same is true,
a view which is supported by FF&S1's description.

As for Grandfather's achievements, there is no reason to assume that the
TL 27+ "Bunch Of Grapes" in Adv 12 uses anything like the same technology as
a TL 15 Imperial Cruiser. It's like comparing an abacus with a modern PC - -
sure they both achieve similar results, but the PC is thousands of years
ahead of the abacus. Take another example - a TL 7 rocket gets to orbit
the hard way, while your TL 15 vessel uses Contragrav. Both get to orbit,
the method is different. Same with jump - The Bunch Of Grapes maybe uses pocket
universes and other uberscience, whilst the TL 15 Jump Drive uses
more primitive / conventional methods.

> Not one for every jump route; a single one that radically distorts space
> time so that all stars within the Milky Way are reachable, if the path and
> technique are known. The core of the Milky Way is now presumed to be a
> massive Black Hole, Yaskoydray could have exploited the natural distortion
> effect of this to create a pinched off pocket universe that touches every
> star system but which has distances between any two points radically reduced.

I was doubtful before. I am now completely sceptical. Grandfather may have
acheived myriads of wonders, but even he had limits. I don't buy that he
could produce enough energy to create a pocket universe with portals through
the entirety of the Milky Way, nor do I see how he could harness 
the _EXTREMELY_ powerful galactic black hole ...

> Not if my preceeding comments are held to be true.

And if they aren't ? Why do you need such high powered explanations to
commonplace things in the Traveller canon such as Jump ? You seem to
have caught White Wolf syndrome - you know, humans have never done
anything and the Cainites are behind every significant event in history.

Personally, I think that Grandfather and the other Ancients are overused,
or at least would be if this list had it's way. Everywhere I look there
are Ancient sites, relics, survivors, massive experiments etc. Every
living thing in the entire Imperium background seems to be dependent on =

Ancient genetic manipulation or transplanting humaniti amongst the stars.=

I am very *tired* of Yaskoydray being the only mover and shaker in the =

established canon. Why don't we give him a long overdue retirement ?

> Not depends on it; the pocket universe has it's own energy to run on; but
> each ship passing thru, by design, must inject additional fuel into the
> power system.

The hydrogen bubble theory of Jump is something else that bothers me. I have
always thought that the vast amounts of hydrogen that were consumed by the
Jump Drive simply provided the energy that "punched" the ship into Jump Space,
rending space time sufficiently to make the transition from one reality to =
another. Given that nature is often uncharitable, I can't see why this =

should be easy to do.

> Perhaps that is why
> the Zhodani are trying to reac the Galactic Core. They have realized that
> underlaying pocket universe is not be maintained in a stable manner and must
> be repaired.

I prefer the Ringworld explanation - that the suns in the core have gone
Nova, and the shockwave is moving towards us at lightspeed and will reach
us in 20000 years. May be the Zhodani are trying to ascertain if this is the
case.

> Ah, but by comming up with an explanation for the 2d maps that peacefully co
> exists with the FTL travel mechanism for the game, I avoid having to explain
> that 3d maps aren't used because it is too much trouble. A good handwave
> doesn't just fix the current rough spot, but should smooth the way for
> several spots to come.

True, a good handwave attempts to restore internal consistency. But turning
a blind eye to something like 2D maps is easier, and does not rely
on overusing the Traveller standard MacGuffin of Ancient Technology.

> Again, a good handwave has covered (or recovered) from less than accurate
> writing. Based on this pocket universe theory, Han's statement still retains
> the meaning of distance, instead of speed. He had found a shorter way thru
> the pocket universe to Kessel, effectively making the run in less that the
> standard distance. =


But Han Solo is from _STAR WARS_ canon, not Traveller. So the statement is
pretty much irrelevant - Traveller may draw on aspects of Star Wars, but it
is not the same. And in any case, we are not trying to explain away the
shortcomings of Star Wars science, but discuss the nature of Traveller's Jump
Drive et al.

> The truest of statements yet; however, for those who are newer to Traveller,
> or who just want different ideas to work from, exchanges like this between
> people who have differenting interpretations may help them develop their own
> ideas. It can also help us refine our own ideas a little bit more.

Yep. Agree totally.

> I had not tracked closely on the Jump Space as an Ancient Artifact thread,
> skimming it because I my pet theory did not contain a Jump 'Space'; however,
> after our exchange, the idea of Jump 'Space' being a massive pocket universe
> created by Grandfather, has intrigued me enough to put a to do on my list
> for reveiwing the digests containing this thread. =

> As I comtemplate our exchange, I may even find parts of it that will lead to
> refinements in Professor Davros' Theory of Jump Effect.

Well, I am glad that you got something out of this thread. Till next
time then,

> And a good day to you, sir.

Indeed ! And to you, sir.

Andy Brick
exeus@compuserve.com
http://www.caco.demon.co.uk/

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

Date: 19 Aug 1997 15:25:47 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Family Aircar (TL10)

Family Aircar (TL10)
Designed by Robert Prior
Summary:
     0.60 displacement ton Box;  1.50 tonnes;  Cr 3616
Chassis:
     8.40 kL Box (3.2 m long x 1.6 m wide x 1.6 m high);  
     Structure: 266 kg of Crystaliron, body 0.01 cm thick, 1 armour rating
Performance:
     100 kW TL10 Fusion Plus power plant;  Fuel: 5.00 L of enriched water
(5.00 kg), 100 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 100 kW Contragrav;  Maximum Speed: 283 km/h;  Range:
28200 km;  Agility: -3DM
Crew & Passengers:
     Crew roster: pilot;  1 crew station;  3 roomy passenger seats
Communications:
     Regional Radio (10 W, TL10, SmVcl)
Sensors:
     No sensors installed.
Other:
     Options: sunroof
     Safety Features: anti-theft system, Roadgrid
     1.18 kL of cargo space


Designed using CSC.

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

Date: 19 Aug 1997 15:28:30 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Sports Car (TL10)

Sports Car (TL10)
Designed by Robert Prior
Summary:
     0.40 displacement ton Box Streamlined;  2.15 tonnes;  kCr 17.0
Chassis:
     5.60 kL Box Streamlined (2.8 m long x 1.4 m wide x 1.4 m high);  
     Structure: 203 kg of Crystaliron, body 0.01 cm thick, 1 armour rating
Performance:
     539 kW TL10 Fusion Plus power plant;  Fuel: 26.10 L of enriched water
(26.10 kg), 100 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 500 kW Contragrav;  Maximum Speed: 3463 km/h;  Range:
344949 km;  Agility: -15DM
Crew & Passengers:
     Crew roster: pilot;  1 crew station;  3 cramped passenger seats
Communications:
     Subcontinental Radio (100 W, TL10, SmVcl)
Sensors:
     Active Subregional Radar (100 W)  Resolution: 5.0 mm per km of range
Other:
     Options: sunroof
     Safety Features: anti-theft system, Roadgrid
     580 L of cargo space


Designed using CSC.

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 10:01:28 -0600
From: Glenn Hoppe <starcity@sk.sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: zero-G beds

Peter Newman wrote:
> 
> Paul D. Owensby wrote
> 
> [snip]
> 
> > In addition, physical fatigue would be reduced greatly by just having what-
> > ever internal gravity there may be switched off.
> 
> > This is a reason the staterooms on my ship plans tend to be smaller than the
> > usual design, I don't include beds in my deckplans. I can't imagine any
> > culture that has gravitic control as an everyday fact of life not having
> > zero g beds as the norm while planet side.

[snip again]

> How about simply using gravity control to move the bed into the ceiling
> when it is not in use and letting it descend when needed.

Why bother?

I think that gravitic control would be something that would be kept
under central control of the captain and crew. It seems to me that it
would be a breach of security to allow passengers access to gravity
controls, even at a localized level.

Why waste power on manipulating bed gravity when space could be
conserved by simply having beds that fold down from the walls or recess
into the floor?

I'm sure advances in materials and ergonomic design will allow future
travellers to sleep in comfort on a few centimeters of SleepWell(tm)
Narcoplast pressure responsive sleep surface that folds down from the
wall.

ADVERTISING BLURB:

Discriminating captains know that passengers accept nothing less than
SleepWell(tm) Narcoplast sleeping surfaces!

This amazing material has hardness properties which can be adjusted by
applying a bit of electric current. Travellers can have the softness of
a down-filled mattress, or the support of a wooden plank, if they
prefer. Articulated joints allow Human passengers to elevate their
torsos, while Vargr passengers can curl up on a perfectly flat surface!

Narcoplast sleeping surfaces feature 768 individually controllable
bedding cells, so you and your partner never have to worry about whether
a soft or firmer surface is desirable. Each cell is computer controlled
for firmness or temperature! Keep those feet toasty and your head cool
with SleepWell(tm) Narcoplast. Installed in fine starports
sector-wide...

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 09:17:22 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: Re: UNESCO....

On Tue, 19 Aug 1997, Harold Hale wrote:
 
>    It is indeed UNSCA *not* UNESCO.  I've spoken personally with the
> gentleman who made the original error and made sure he had a sufficent
> caffeine fix for next time.
> 
>    Diet Mountain Dew anyone?  :-)

What, and miss out on the sugar buzz...what are you crazy???!! ;-)

Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs

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

Date: 19 Aug 1997 16:27:16 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Swamp Raider (TL8)

Swamp Raider (TL8)
Designed by Robert Prior

Summary:
     2.70 displacement ton box;  38.6 tonnes;  kCr 423
Chassis:</DT>
     37.8 kL box (5.2 m long x 2.7 m wide x 2.7 m high);  
     Structure: 653 kg of composite laminate, body 1.5 cm thick
     Armour: 10 front (2.5 cm, moderate slope), 8 sides (1.5 cm), 
     9 rear (1.5 cm, moderate slope), 8 top (1.5 cm), 8 bottom (1.5 cm)
Performance:
     2.71 MW TL5 Imp. Internal Combustion power plant;  
     Fuel: 6.78 kL of high-grade hcarb (6.78 tonnes), 20 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 2.70 MW hoverskirt with debris filters;  
     Maximum Speed: 94 km/h;  Range: 1890 km;  Agility: +3DM
Crew:
     Crew roster: driver, 3 gunners;  4 crew stations
Armament:
     Weapon                          Damage    Range          Shots   Reloads   Notes
     Cannon, Heavy-8                 19 (17 expVery Long      1       30       +4DM, 1 gunner
     Machinegun, Medium-8            5         Long           200     20       coaxial
     Autocannon, Light-8             9         Long           100     30       1 gunner
     Autocannon, Light-8             9         Long           100     30       1 gunner
Communications:
     Subcontinental Radio (10.00 kW, TL8, SmVcl, MilSpec, DirFnd)
Sensors:
     Active Subregional Radar (100 W, MilSpec, DispArray)  Resolution: 2.0 cm
per km of range


Designed with CSC

Note: HTML file also available (if you want to post this to your web page).

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 97 11:40:15 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: Brawling vs Martial Arts skill

On 08/19/97 at 08:03 AM,  Erwin Fritz <efritz@glja.com> said:

>Okay, so Brawling is defined as the ability to fight, without having had
>training, in hand-to-hand combat. It may involve the use of nearby objects
>as weapons (bottles, rocks, etc.).

>A Martial Arts skill would, of course, involve considerable training. A
>user of this skill would also be able to use nearby objects as  weapons.

Geeze, we could make this *really* detailed if we wanted to.

Unarmed Combat (Cluster)
   Boxing - formalized fighting method using the hands to deliver blows
   Martial Art - one of many formalized fighting methods using hands,
       feet, holds and throws (This *could* be a cluster!)
   Wrestling - formalized fighting method using holds and throws   

Melee Combat (Cluster)
   Brawling - rough and tumble street fighting using clubs, stick,
       bottles, hands or anything else that is available
   Fencing - one of many formalized fighting methods using swords,
       including Cutlass, Saber, Rapier, Broadsword, etc. (Cluster?)
   Flexible - includes whips, ropes, flails, and other flexible weapons
       (Cluster?)
   Knife - any short one handed blade
   Spear - includes quarterstaff and rifle with or without bayonette
   
Comments:  Ok, it's too much detail..and not enough at the same time. Yes,
Martial Artists use weapons, sometimes, but that isn't usually their
primary training.  Most people look down their noses at Brawling as
"untrained", but if you have Brawling 4 then, by golly, you ARE trained and
should be more than a match for Mr. Karata 2...IMO.

Maybe we should simplify and cut down on the skill choices.  Just have
general groupings.  The effects of a Good Brawler and a Martial Artist are
the same after all...call the ONE unarmed combat skill Brawler, Martial
Artist, or even Unarmed Combat, and it can stand for *any* style of
hand-to-hand, mostly, unarmed combat technique.

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

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1714
***********************************
Traveller-digest      Tuesday, August 19 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1715



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: E21 Chronology
Re: Mileu:E21
Re: Flawed accumulator energy densities & superconductivity
Re: UNESCO develops Jump Drive
Re: alternate tech discussion
Re: Eurocentrism (and Americocentrism)
Re: Flawed accumulator energy densities
Re: Event Horizon
Re: Fighters, fatigue, bathrooms, and zero-G beds
Re: Jump Drives
Re: Jump Drives
Re: RoM/Terran TL
Re: M-Drives & QSDS
Re: Biowar and the Terrans
Re: RoM Tech! (the undead beastie rears its head again!)
Re: Stutterwarp & Heisenberg revisited once again ...
Re: Seat Size in FF&S2
New Vehicles
Re: How Big is Your Starport?
Relativism in Traveller

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 03:59:56 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: E21 Chronology

In mail you write:

>    The space station in _2001_ is several generations ahead of Mir.  Mir
> is late 70s technology, somewhat more advanced than America's Skylab. 
> It *is* operational, more than can be said of the American et al. "Space
> Station Freedom" or whatever they are calling it now.

At the same time, the space station in 2001 was based on *50s* designs.
I've still got an old Lindberg Line model of a wheel type space station
kicking around in storage...

The difference between the 2001 station and things like "Freedom" is
that the 2001 version was built to be used as a multipurpose
*commercial* as well as scientific venture. Freedom is an excercise in
stupidity because they are trying *so* hard to "optimize" things that
they actually increase the costs needlessly (things like using a 2 kHz
power supplies instead of the "standard" 400 Hz used in aircraft. For a
savings of a few ounces per unit, they wind up requiring everything
that uses power to be custom built!)

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 04:06:18 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Mileu:E21

In mail you write:

> Leonard Erickson writes: 
>
>>>    Well there were some things that could have been explained better,
>>> but I did note that the fighters and other spacecraft didn't use magic
>>> plates to make them move through space.
>>
>>No, they used magic reaction drives that let fighter sized ships launch
>>from earth and rendevous with a task force at Jupiter without
>>refueling. And do so in only a few hours (*nobody* can fly a fighter
>>longer than that, between fatigue and the lack of a bathroom...)
>
>    About the same time it takes the Enterprise of Star Trek to travel at
> impluse to the same location.
>
>    As for flying a fighter for long duration, the pilots of those F-111s
> that bombed Libya back in the 80s flew for *much* longer than three
> hours.  As I recall, so did a number of other American fighter pilots
> when they deployed to the Gulf during operation Desert Shield/Storm.
>
>    In fact there are so *many* pilots of single or dual seat fighters
> that fly for more than three hours straight, I'm surprised that you
> would make such a statement.

I was thinking more along the lines of 7 or 8 hours, which *is* extreme
for a pilot. 

>>They also had the Trojan asteroids within sight of Jupiter. And aliens
>>heading for Earth going past the task force at velocities so low that
>>several minutes of combat at visual ranges were possible...
>
>    I won't make excuses for Trojan asteroids that turn up where they
> aren't suppose to be (the number of basic astronomical violations Star
> Trek and even Traveller have made over the years is enough to make
> Galileo spin at 78 rpms in his grave).  However, since we have no idea
> what the Chigs were thinking (maybe they were just being cautious or
> preparing to send in scouts out ahead of the main body), I don't think
> their cruising speed is a very valid point of criticism.

The thing is, there's *no* excuse for the entire Chig force to be
moving at speeds of only a few hundred km per *hour* relative to
Jupiter when they are heading for earth. Heck, at those speeds, they'd
fall into the planet!

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 04:58:15 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Flawed accumulator energy densities & superconductivity

In mail you write:

>      Can anyone tell me what the impact of room temperature superconducting
> materials will be on the Traveller universe. I'm not sure if these are part
> of the official background or not, but if they are they seem pretty
> invisible outside of Mag Lev applications. I've been reading Larry Niven's
> Ringworld Throne and superconducting material makes an appearance as a
> cloth and (i assume) a long-life power storage mechanism.
>      In traveller terms how would RTemp superconductors affect power
> storage? Would they be a good or better substitute for homopolar generators
> (flywheels) in weapon systems, for instance? And how would they perform as
> an armour coating?

First off, Niven has a *major* goof with regards to superconductors.
They do *not* superconduct *heat*. So several things he has characters
do with them won't work.

As for power storage, a superconducting ring can store power. You have
a current flowing around the ring endlessly. Trouble is, this generates
a magnetic field. So there are four modes of failure for the ring:

1. the current reaches the current limit for the superconductor. At
   which point it quits superconducting and has a real, non-zero
   resistance. Given the current level, the ring will almost instantly
   explode into vapor from resistive heating. (ouch!)
2. The magnetic field reaches the field density limit for the
   superconductor. At which point the material quits superconducting,
   and events proceed as in #1.
3. The magnetic forces exert an outward pressure on the ring. At the
   point where the pressure exceeds the tensile strength of the ring
   material, it comes apart explosively.
4. if you place the ring inside some sort of reinforcing, to support it
   against the pressure, at some point the pressure will exceed the
   compressive strength of the ring material. It'll crack, the cracks
   will have resistance, and the ring explodes into vapor.

The current and magnetic field density limits on superconductors vary
with the material. Some are pretty good at handling high currents and
high field density. Tensile strength and compressive strengths are
pretty low (most superconductors are ceramic like materials). 

The energy density of a superconducting ring *might* be pretty high,
but it's limited by the factors I listed, and nobody really expects the
energy density to get really extreme. 

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 04:22:50 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: UNESCO develops Jump Drive

In mail you write:

>
> Someone said (I get the digest, and I forgot to copy it):
> UNESCO develops Jump Drive
>
> WHAT!?!
> UNESCO!?!
> This hopelessly corrupt organization couldn't develop an ulcer in a CEO. The
> spent all their money developing training programs for revolutions in the
> third world.  

I think that somewhere along the lines someone got their acronyms
crossed, as whatever UN organization is supposed to have developed jump
drive had "Space" as part of the name, and isn't supposed to exist for
at least 20 more years!

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 04:44:34 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: alternate tech discussion

In mail you write:

> I somehow don't think we'll be using silicon chips in 100 years.

Why not? We still use wirewound resistors and paper dielectric
capacitors in some applications. We even use tubes sometimes.

And things like copper oxide rectifiers have been in use for over 100
years. So I figure that silicon based devices will hang on in some
niches. Even now its usually simpler to use 74xxx chips for interfacing
the cutting edge stuff than to build a custom chip for the job (at
least until you get into massive production runs).

I'd not be surprised to find an 80x86 type chip inside the room
thermostat, for instance. :-)

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 04:50:19 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Eurocentrism (and Americocentrism)

In mail you write:

>
> Speaketh the Stephen;
> Ah come on Marc, that's weak and you know it!  Traveller is VERY
> Eurocentric in terms of cultural bias.  Where are all the Indian colonies?
> Still on Earth. 
>
> Given their population pressures you have to KNOW they tried to ship some of
> them off to the stars.  And all the ones who went would not have been
> speaking the Queen's English!

Population pressure doesn't work as a reason for shipping people off.
You can't ship them as fast as they reproduce.

What population pressure *will* do, is get some "criminals" shipped
off, and get a lot of folks who can't take the pressure, but can manage
to scrape togther a stake to emigrate. But neither will affect the home
population noticeably. It just gives a "safety valve" for getting rid
of the discontented.

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 03:48:11 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Flawed accumulator energy densities

In mail you write:

> At 10:19 PM 8/17/97 PST, you wrote:
>>In mail you write:
>>Unfortunately, to use these as a power source, you have to be able to
>>use an output voltage noticeably lower than the max voltage of the
>>capacitor. 
>
> DC to DC converters could be used to increase the output voltage, you 
> just have to be careful to purchase (or build) one that can handle 
> high currents.
>
>>And add circuitry to keep the discharge at the lower voltage
>>until the voltage in the cap drops below it.
>
> I'm not sure what you mean by this.  The output voltage of a capacitor
> when fully charged is equal to the voltage level used to charge it.  

But the voltage drops along a log or exponential (I forget which) curve
as you discharge it. That's why I said that you'd have to use a lower
voltage than the cap was charged to. You want one that's a ways below
the "knee" on the discharge curve. You then need to use something to
keep the output voltage of your "capacitor + gizmo" *at* the lower
voltage during the portion of the discharge when the capacitor voltage
is higher than your nominal output voltage.

This is a *much* messier situation than the discharge curve for a
battery cell.

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 03:34:16 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Event Horizon

In mail you write:

> Scott Galliand wrote:
>
>>>It looks like they've got their M-Drives up to Traveller standard,
>>>though.  It took some 72 hours for the ship to reach Neptune from
>>>Earth.
>>
>>Um, hate to correct you, but it took 56 days for the Lewis & Clark to get
>>to Neptune from Earth orbit, not 72 hours.  I saw the movie myself about
>>four hours ago.
>>
>>Scott Galliand
>
> Just got back myself.
>
> WHUFFO they need grav tanks for?  For the 30G acceleration, ya say?  Outa
> their ion-freakin'-drive?  Aw jeez.  FF&S2 *IS* totally screwed, ain't it?
> It's all you gearheads' fault, too!

Let's see... Neptune is about 30 AU out. That's about 4.5e9 km. or
2.25e9 to turnover if we assume constant acceleration. 28 days to
turnover is 2.4e6 seconds. Plug in the formulas and I get around
8/100ths of a gee. Boy, they really need those G tanks. :-)
(But it isn't *too* unreasonable for an ion drive!)

> WHUFFO ol' Justin could go on yacking his damn-fool head off in an airlock
> that was 20perfreakincent decompressed?

20% decompressed is just "high mountain" equivalent. 12 psi of air, and
around 3.6 psi of oxygen. Not a problem.

Now if it was decompressed *to* 20% (rather than *by* 20%) it's a
different story. 3 psi total, .9 psi oxygen results in rapid
unconciousness unless you were born in the Andes or Himalayas.

> WHUFFO the Jet-Propelled Wonder
> can shout howdy into his vacc suit outside the ship's window and they can
> hear him?  Is the atmosphere of Neptune "A"-class or WHAT?  Exotic, my
> alveoli.

Was his helmet againt the window? If so you can get conduction thru the
glass.

> WHUFFO the forces of "ultimate chaos and ultimate evil" can't think of
> nothing naughtier than face-slashing and evsiceration?

Because then they'd have to rate the film X!

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 04:28:12 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Fighters, fatigue, bathrooms, and zero-G beds

In mail you write:

>><< And do so in only a few hours (*nobody* can fly a fighter longer than
>>that, between fatigue and the lack of a bathroom...)>>
>>
>>  Oh, quite the contrary. Fighter pilots are fitted with, shall we say
>>"equipment," that eliminates the necessity of a latrine in the plane for 
> long
>>flights.
>
> In addition, physical fatigue would be reduced greatly by just having what-
> ever internal gravity there may be switched off. There is IMHO a large 
> difference between being stuck in the cockpit of an F15 for 12 hours under-
> going the pull of gravity making your legs and butt get numb and tired on
> the seat underneath you, and floating just off the seat in a natural fetal 
> position with no strain on your body in an inertially damped space fighter.
> Sure, for combat you will be strapped in tight, but for a long run out some-
> wheres with no combat expected, you'd be expected to loosen up the
> belts a bit and float, perhaps catch a few Z's with the computer set to wake
> you if anything funny is detected.

Well, I just ran some quick figures. If we assume that it is an 8 hour
trip to Jupiter (about 5 AU) then at constant acceleration, it's about
..36 g. Low, but not *that* low. 

And regardless of the gravity, you run into trouble at the point were
the pilot needs to defecate. Urination is handled by a "pilot tube",
but the other is rather more difficult to deal with. 

> usual design, I don't include beds in my deckplans. I can't imagine any 
> culture that has gravitic control as an everyday fact of life not having 
> zero g beds as the norm while planet side. Using this as a given (in my
> campaign, at least), I can see absolutely no reason to wasted valuable
> shipboard space on anything more complex than a containment system
> (i.e. net) attached to the wall to hold you in place, or at most a type of 
> closet/cubby like some of the shuttle folks sleep in now.

Well, energy wise, a zero-g bed is *expensive*. It's equivalent to
hauling a person 1000 miles straight up against a 1 g field (or
boosting them to escape velocity). It also gets nasty if the person
slips out of the bed's "field", as they'll *regain* all that energy as
kinetic energy. Which results in an interesting display as they turn
into a meteor inside the confines of their bedroom.

On shipboard, for the same reasons that the ship's field doesn't extend
far, it's much cheaper to turn off the field (actually, since you need
to keep the inertial compensation, you really set it on "neutral").
But on planets, you have this *huge* gravity field to fight against.

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com	<--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com	<--last resort

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 97 18:18 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: Jump Drives

In-Reply-To: <199708151347.IAA23690@brain.ames.net>

Andrew,

> On the list, some people came up with the rather cool (I thought) "Hydrogen
> Bubble" theory about jump fuel - but if you consider Annic Nova canon, it
> appears that this cannot be the case.

ISTR Annic Nova was declared non-canon several years ago.
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 97 18:18 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: Jump Drives

In-Reply-To: <199708151347.IAA23690@brain.ames.net>

Andrew,

> On the list, some people came up with the rather cool (I thought) "Hydrogen
> Bubble" theory about jump fuel - but if you consider Annic Nova canon, it
> appears that this cannot be the case.

ISTR Annic Nova was declared non-canon several years ago.
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 97 18:18 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: RoM/Terran TL

In-Reply-To: <9708151604.AA02497@carbon.cudenver.edu>

Leroy,

> Agreed!  In fact, since you know how hard fighting the Solomani were, it is
> also reasonable to assume that both Imperial and Solomani TL15 regulars were
> left out of the fight because they were heavily casualty prone from recent
> fighting.  Remember that the seige of Earth is one of the _last_ events of
> the war.  The Solomani units are probably just home guard reserves that they
> had to drum up to defend Earth.

IIRC Earth was packed with everything the Solomani could find. At that time, 
there were no TL15 Solomani troops.
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 09:48:14 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: M-Drives & QSDS

At 07:01 PM 8/18/97 +0100, you wrote:
>Looking at QSDS1.5...
>
>What manuever drives do TL9 jump capable ships use if Heplar starts at TL10...?

Fusion rockets, Ion drives, or in one memorable system, solar sails.
- --
+------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry         dberry@hooked.net   |
| Gearhead & Planetologist, Traveller since 1977 |
|     Inquistor Magnus, Royal Commission for     |
|               Canon Correctness                |
|         http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|************************************************|
| "I believe in my heart that all astromoners    |
|  should be forced to go outside on summer      |
|  nights, just to admire the sky."  -Carl Sagan |
+------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 97 18:18 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: Biowar and the Terrans

In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19970815150528.0070bc18@braeburn.mac.co.nz>

Andrew,

> Would the Terrans use the weapons?
> The Terrans undoubtedly would develop bioweapons against the Vilani. They are
> just too useful to ignore. However would they have actually used them? The
> answer is probably a highly qualified yes. In the early wars the Vilani
> capacity to retaliate with chemical and nuclear weapons is great. I'd say that
> the Terrans would hold off initially. If the Vilani used nukes against
> civilian targets then the Terrans would probably have responded with bio
> attacks to drive home the point that this was not a good idea. However when the
> Terrans develop more advanced non-lethal bioagents, then I could see the
> Terrans employing non-lethal bioagents against military targets.

With their vulnerability and lack of medtech, the Vilani might misinterpret 
accidental infection (eg from a POW with a cold) as a deliberate attack!
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 97 18:18 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: RoM Tech! (the undead beastie rears its head again!)

In-Reply-To: <33F4D0D9.FB3@pinn.net>

Daniel,

> > I would reverse the two proportions - Traveller is 95% background, else it
> > wouldn't have survived four different rules versions.
> > 
> > Dom
>  
> I concur.  Were Traveller mostly game mechanics, we couldn't say
> that we are still playing it. The CT rules were THAT Traveller.
>  
> Traveller is the IMPERIUM.  It is every idea we have read, heard, or
> spoken conceived around Cleon's dream.  Sol has significance against
> the larger tapestry of Sylea, and while other fictional backgrounds
> may mimic aspects of Traveller, it is the Imperium and its surrounds
> that seem to fire our imaginations.  Why else would we argue so
> fervently about individual details of what is "canonical" or not.
>  
> The mechanics may come and go, but the Imperium remains.

Agreed. There are people who play using the GURPS mechanics, or a variation of 
RuneQuest system, but they're still playing Traveller.
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 10:00:01 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Stutterwarp & Heisenberg revisited once again ...

At 11:02 AM 8/19/97 -0400, Andy wrote:

>Whoah ! What deep system probes have disappeared ?

Mars Observer for one.  A couple of Russian probes, including a craft that
was making a close approach to Phobos when it went off-line.. the Soviets
refused to release the last image sent by the probe.  

So many probes have died between Earth and Mars that NASA jokes about the
"Great Galactic Ghoul" or "Big Man's Flyswatter."

- --
+------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry         dberry@hooked.net   |
| Gearhead & Planetologist, Traveller since 1977 |
|     Inquistor Magnus, Royal Commission for     |
|               Canon Correctness                |
|         http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|************************************************|
| "I believe in my heart that all astromoners    |
|  should be forced to go outside on summer      |
|  nights, just to admire the sky."  -Carl Sagan |
+------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 09:54:55 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Seat Size in FF&S2

At 01:31 AM 8/19/97 -0700, you wrote:
>In Table 207 in FF&S2 seats are now back to 1.5 m^3 at the minimum and
>2.5-3.5 m^2 for normal seats.  From doing some measurements I've done on cars
>the 1-2 m^3 in CSC makes much more sense.  Why the change in FF&S2?  
>3.5 m^3 for a normal seat or any workstation is a whole hell of a lot of 
>space.  Cars and private planes simply do not have or need this amount of 
>space and I can't see any reason why an air raft would need it either.
>
>Anyone else have reasons?

Space to moce around in for work and entry/egress.  I'm about 1.65m tall,
so folding myself into a 1.5m^3 space would be a bit cramped, and difficult
for me to work in.  I've done it (the driver's space for a M-113A3 isn't
very big, but I know I suffered a bit in the task rolls.

Workstations and bridgeworkstations need to be much larger.  If you work in
a cubicle, measure it out, that's what your workstation and seat should be
considered as.
- --
+------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry         dberry@hooked.net   |
| Gearhead & Planetologist, Traveller since 1977 |
|     Inquistor Magnus, Royal Commission for     |
|               Canon Correctness                |
|         http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|************************************************|
| "I believe in my heart that all astromoners    |
|  should be forced to go outside on summer      |
|  nights, just to admire the sky."  -Carl Sagan |
+------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: 19 Aug 1997 17:38:44 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: New Vehicles

I've uploaded some new vehicle designs, done using CSC. 

Location: 
http://www.interlog.com/~dmci104/GamingClub/Traveller/vehicles.html

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 20:16:03 +0100
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: Re: How Big is Your Starport?

>How's that for starters?
>
>How should world populations factor in?
>
>Rob

Sounds OK but PLEASE use some handier logscales:
1,1.5,2,3,5,7,10,15 etc
1,2,5,10,20,50,100 etc
1,3,10,30,100,300 etc
1,10,100,300 etc

When someone dreams up a table about the amount of freight a starport can
handle one do not have to come up with numbers like "781 250 tons" snd
such. Otherwise a good idea.

Also IMHO the singlke most important factor after starport class is population.


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

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 11:57:03 -0600
From: lwlguatn@ouray.cudenver.edu (Leroy W.L. Guatney)
Subject: Relativism in Traveller

In the recent past, Harold Hale has attempted to get a discussion going
on relativism.  He raises some points/issues about the use of "relativism"
in Traveller writings.  I suspect that he was largely biased by its use in
the MT heyday, and TNE to a lesser extent, but I'll let him explain that if
he desires.  I would just like to point out some things from my perspective
(relativistically :) and am interested in anything anyone else has to say.
I don't believe Harold has touched on it all, so I am firing off this thread.

Yes, things were written from a Vargr point of view, and we had we also had
the Vilani side of things, presented to us in _Vilani & Vargr_.  That is
sort of natural given the fact that the book's nature.  If I understand HH
correctly, where relativism fails in V&V (just _one_ example, there are
more) is in that there are not too many characters who are of either "V"
that are adventuring in those spheres--they are characters of those races
in the Third Imperium.

Also, when it comes down to players/referees reading the materials, the
subtle ambiguities are lost on we humans trying to understand the author's
intent.  With no clear definition stating "what is what", it is a rather
ambiguous interpretation to be made.

At the same time, I would argue that relativism is a fact of life, though
it may be done better, with explanations in future work.  In that extent,
I agree with Harold.  But, bear in mind that as our "fact of life" is with
us, there is a certain amount of reality that can (must?) be dealt with
that uses reasoning like:

   The Imperial Citizen in Milieu 0 is in some ways _vastly_ different
   from their counterpart in Milieu 1100 (M1100 for example only).
   After a thousand years of the normal evolution of a technological
   society, such a difference may be formed by seeing the difference
   between the humans of 20th century Earth as contrasted by the
   (relatively) primitive society of 50,000 years earlier--the larger
   margin of difference being that the latter end of the range overlaps
   into the beginning of the Technological Age.

   If the reader is concerned with a 52,000 year period being compared
   side by side to a 1,000 year period, the reader should consider how
   world public opinion on an issue can shift in very short periods of
   time, given sufficiently advanced technology.  An example is the
   period surrounding the Viet Nam War in the United States.  Consider
   the number of people who thought the War Protestors in the early
   periods of the War were traitors? (This author does not have the
   exact factual values, but suffice it to say that if it was not in
   the high ninety percentage spread of Americans, it was certainly a
   majority.)  After the War, the situation was very different.  Sure
   it is possible that some of the people on those college campuses
   later wrote the "history" in classic Chinese succeeding Dynastic
   fashion, but these _formerly_ traitorous protestors are now heralded
   as heroes (by some).  At the same time, some have gone on to suggest
   that Jimmy Carter did not get re-elected for his pardoning of those
   who fled the draft to Canada in the north.

   That is one example of how planetary commo can set an opinion, right
   or wrong, and change relativistically, a world view in a mere decade.
  
So, I see relativism as a reality.  You can put in general social trends,
politics, religion, and on any subject that people talk about.  If Traveller
uses relativism, then it is probably as good as the author's ability to
write about it.  I don't think that means that Traveller should abandon a
social gearheading device just because it causes confusion.  People confuse
people, not relativism.

(I am particualarly interested in Dr. Clark's response to this one, but I'll
certainly read others. :)

(My PPS below, inspired this next bit.)
As an aside, I am very telemobile.  Friends always ask me why I don't get an
ISP.  With two regular school accounts, and usu. another 3-4 class accounts,
I have plenty of internet access.  I am a practicing UNIX administrator, and
it pretty easy for me to keep on the net.  Presently, my two main accounts
are experiencing OS upgrades, so I am hopping from stone to stone, so to
speak.  Most people would just live with the 24-72 hour outage.  I respond
by rerouting as seamlessly as possible.  The problem is that since most people
just use the "reply" on their mailers, things get routed that I can't control.
Oh well, our tech is getting better. <G>

Anyway, this is how I view the Trav player characters that I referee.  Adding
a few tech levels can make common Traveller tech almost incomprehensible to
the average player.  That is my only stand against gearheading.  It is not
too terrible, but I wanted to say it before any of my comments get
misunderstood.


In my opinion,

Leroy


PS: I am taking my last CLAS elective this fall which will be Intro. to
    Social Psychology, just a sophmore level class.  I expect to quote
    the TML in papers I figure I'll have to write.  And of course, and
    more importantly <G>, this relates to Traveller.

PPS: If anyone wants to write to me directly, my ouray account (this one)
     goes down tomorrow for maintenance, and my carbon account comes back
     tonight or tomorrow at some time.


Leroy Guatney - lwlg@usa.net
 University of Mars, NorthAm Campus
 Class of '98

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1715
***********************************
Traveller-digest      Tuesday, August 19 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1716



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: How Big is Your Starport?
Re: zero-G beds
TML Archives?
Re: Brawling vs Martial Arts skill
Re: ARRRRGGGHH!!! Mk. II
Re: alternate tech discussion
Chimera Missile Boat
Brawling vs Martial Arts
Re: Event Horizon
Re: RoM/Terran TL
Re: RoM Tech! (the undead beastie rears its head again!)
UNanswered
Re: Event Horizon
Gearhead Challenge: More on M-Drives!
Ruie/Regina
LaGrange Points
Re: alternate tech discussion
Re: Fighters, fatigue, bathrooms, and zero-G beds

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 18:54:53 +0100
From: John Wood <John@elvw.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: How Big is Your Starport?

Robert Eaglestone" <eaglesto@nortel.ca> wrote,
>1. Calculate Size Index
>2. Determine Starport Capabilities
>Size   Orbital Passenger       Freight         Fuel    Shuttles
>Index  Ports   Facilities      Handling                
[rules snipped]

>How's that for starters?

Interesting!  I recently got _Far & Away_ #1, featuring a couple of
relevant MT articles by J. Andrew Keith.  "Planetfall" discussed the
in's and outs of takeoff/landing/orbital docking from the ship crew's
perspective; "The Compleat Starport" tackled starport/spaceport
capabilities.  For comparison, here's the features from his contents
table:

  Orbital Port
  Naval Base
  Scout Base
  Extrality
  # Berths
  Traffic
  Starship Construction
  Spaceship Construction
  Naval Architect
  Refined fuel
  Unrefined fuel
  Search & Rescue
  Major Repairs
  Minor Repairs
  Superficial Repairs
  Overhaul
  Life Support Supplies
  Lodging
  Entertainment
  Brokerage
  Warehousing
  Security
  Berthing Costs
  Shuttle Service
  Transport Terminal
  TAS

I like your use of port size, but I also like the way M. Keith's article
allows for port "specialisation" (e.g., passenger ports and freight
ports; comfortable and expensive ports vs. cheap 'n' cheerful).  Perhaps
a choice/die roll based on size for each facility?  For instance, using
size + (2D-7)/2 would allow a size 5 port to have 0-64 orbital ports;
handle 30-326 passengers and 50-31,250t freight; supply 25-15,625t of
fuel and 0-32 shuttles.

I don't think individual downports should have lots of orbital ports,
btw - so I'd regard the o.p. number purely as a tonnage indicator.  Is
this what you intended, or did you mean them as individual orbital
ports?

>How should world populations factor in?

I'll think some more about this whole issue when I have time, and let
you know.
 
John G. Wood  |  john@elvw.demon.co.uk  |  Oxford, United Kingdom

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 13:42:01 -0600
From: Joseph Heck <ccjoe@showme.missouri.edu>
Subject: Re: zero-G beds

>Why waste power on manipulating bed gravity when space could be
>conserved by simply having beds that fold down from the walls or recess
>into the floor?

Why waste paper printing out those darned hardcopies... we've screens to
read them on.

No seriously - I know that anology fails a thousand times over, but one of
the key "features" of the background of Traveller, especially T4, is that
power is cheap. Amazingly cheap. Blindingly wasteful, conspicious
consumption cheap. It'd sell, just cause it's cool...

that is, until someone said it causes cancer.

(oh so american... huh?)

 joe                          (573) 882-2000
 ccjoe@showme.missouri.edu    http://www.missouri.edu/~ccjoe
 PGP Fingerprint: E3 3F DF 08 BE 3E 44 A0  EE A9 80 7E 22 99 CD DF
 "with a little practice, writing can be an intimidating and
 impenetrable fog!" -- Calvin

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 11:49:36 -0700 (PDT)
From: "John R. Snead" <jsnead@netcom.com>
Subject: TML Archives?

Where are the TML archives?  I'm sure this should be obvious to me, I'm 
far from and expert at computers.

Thanks-


- -John Snead jsnead@netcom.com

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 13:05:32 -0600
From: Erwin Fritz <efritz@glja.com>
Subject: Re: Brawling vs Martial Arts skill

Eris Reddoch wrote:
> 
> On 08/19/97 at 08:03 AM,  Erwin Fritz <efritz@glja.com> said:
> 
> >Okay, so Brawling is defined as the ability to fight, without having had
> >training, in hand-to-hand combat. It may involve the use of nearby objects
> >as weapons (bottles, rocks, etc.).
> 
> >A Martial Arts skill would, of course, involve considerable training. A
> >user of this skill would also be able to use nearby objects as  weapons.
> 
> Geeze, we could make this *really* detailed if we wanted to.
> 
> Unarmed Combat (Cluster)
[snip]
> 
> Melee Combat (Cluster)
[snip]
> 
> Comments:  Ok, it's too much detail..and not enough at the same time. Yes,
> Martial Artists use weapons, sometimes, but that isn't usually their
> primary training.  Most people look down their noses at Brawling as
> "untrained", but if you have Brawling 4 then, by golly, you ARE trained and
> should be more than a match for Mr. Karata 2...IMO.
> 

Agreed. In hand-to-hand combat, usually the first really good hit 
determines the winner. Definitely a guy who's been street-fighting for
10 years will kick the crap out of a junior belt martial arts guy.

> Maybe we should simplify and cut down on the skill choices.  Just have
> general groupings.  The effects of a Good Brawler and a Martial Artist are
> the same after all...call the ONE unarmed combat skill Brawler, Martial
> Artist, or even Unarmed Combat, and it can stand for *any* style of
> hand-to-hand, mostly, unarmed combat technique.
> 

This is what I was thinking too. I like the name "Unarmed Combat"; it
certainly fits better than Brawling if you include martial arts
in it.

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 19:09:53 +0100
From: John Wood <John@elvw.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: ARRRRGGGHH!!! Mk. II

Jay Stranahan <jaystr@best.com> wrote,
> Marbles off a sidewalk.

Please, just follow your own advice and quit.  You have insulted a
number of people on this list.  You have failed to listen to their
responses while accusing them of doing the same (listening does not mean
you have to agree with them, but it *does* mean you have to pay proper
attention to the content).  You have continued to use a highly
inflammatory tone - once, I will forgive.  Twice, I can ignore.  Three
times, and you have induced me to flame someone for the first time ever.

I would like to thank the gearheads of this list for their restraint to
date in the face of extreme provocation.

Disclaimer:  I am not a gearhead, nor do I play one in T4.
I will not be buying FFS2 for the same reason I didn't get FFS1 -
designing hardware at that level doesn't interest me.  However, I'm
pleased it exists for those who enjoy such things.

Apologies to the rest of the list for the rant.  I actually agree with
some of Jay's other complaints - but no way am I going to speak up in
support of them right now.
 
John G. Wood  |  john@elvw.demon.co.uk  |  Oxford, United Kingdom

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 20:20:10 +0100
From: Bruce E J Lewis <bruce@legend.ftech.co.uk>
Subject: Re: alternate tech discussion

At 04:44 19/08/97 PST, Leonard Erickson wrote:
>I'd not be surprised to find an 80x86 type chip inside the room
>thermostat, for instance. :-)
>
	I would. A chip in a control panel would only be part of a system.
Eventually this would need replacing, say, the wiring, connections, etc...
and the heaters could wear out thus precipitating renewal of the whole
system anyway. Most rubbish you buy these days doesn't last five minutes,
how is any of it supposed to last 100 years!

	As for silicon, I thought scientists had been working on other compounds
to be used as processor bases for years. A long time ago I heard of a
substance called gallium arsenide, that is supposed to speed up the
electron flow, or offer less resistance to it, or something like that.

	Something else I once read about was that instead of the processor having
a printed electrical circuit, all circuits would in fact be made up of
millions of tiny laser beams, with light emitters and receivers to act as
the connections. The advantage of this would be that as light travels much
faster than electricity - about twice as fast I believe - the beams could
cross each other without interfering with each other, thus ruling out the
possibility of a short circuit and enabling all circuit paths to take a
more direct route, speeding up processing time even more.

	This would enable a completely different processor architecture to be
used. It would be very different from a 80x86 type processor.

	If we're talking about these things now, then silicon chips will be almost
unheard of as one approaches the 22nd century. Silicon chips then will be
as dead as something that is very dead indeed.

	See ya...


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

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 97 16:33:32 -0400
From: Lewis Roberts <lewis@chara.gsu.edu>
Subject: Chimera Missile Boat

 Hi,
Here is a TL-12 SDB I wrote up. I wrote it up for Aubaine in the
Reformation Coaltion in 1200, but you can easily change the name and
make it a Sylean SDB in Year 0, or some other planet in another year.
The write up gives both TNE and T4 stats.  

Lewis

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

Chimera Missile Boat

During the time after recontact with the Hivers, the Aubaini government
put a major effort into building system defenses in case of a Vampire
attack.  This effort continued into 1200, and ended with the founding
of the Reformation Coalition.  The RC needed more jump capable ships,
both military and exploratory.  The Aubaine governmet put off building
more system defense boats for itself, but it still builds SDBs for
other governments in the Coalition, who have no defenses against attack. 

During the period from 1194 to 1200, 5 Chimera Missile Defense Boats
were built, they all serve in the Aubaine navy, patrolling the system. 
The Chimera is primarily designed to protect a crucial world in the
system, either a gas giant, or the main world itself.  While patrolling
a gas giant, the Chimera is designed to hide deep in the gas giant.  To
counter the tremendous pressures of the gas giant, the hull is stressed
to 10Gs. When at these depths, the ship will be out of communcation
range, due to the opacity of the atmosphere. It is thought that the
ship will only enter extreme depths after expending its missile
capacity, or repairing battle damage.   This also protects the boat
when it is hiding in a world's ocean.  Other less expensive ships, such
as Dragon, Griffen, Manticore or Medusa SDBs patrol higher regions of
the gas giant, and its moons.  These ships and automated sensor buoys
act as lookouts for enemy ships.  Once an enemy ship is spotted, a
judgment is made whether it is a significant threa

The ship only accelerates at 1G, most of the time the ship will by
lying in wait for enemy ships.  Extra acceleration would allow the ship
to evade enemy fire, but it was thought extra fire power was a better use of space.
If the ship is forced to enter extreme depths, where its 1G
acceleration may not be able to get it out, its fuel tanks have been
specially modified to be configurable as ballast tanks, allowing the
ship to come out of extreme depths.  This also allows the ship to save
itself if it suffers a manuver drive hit, and it is slowly falling into
the gas giant.  The ship only 36 G-turns or refined fuel, but it can
fill its entire fuel tank in under 9 minutes. As it will normally be
operating in a gas giant, scooping up additional fuel while on the run,
should be no problem.  In an emergency, unrefined fuel can be used in a
HEPlaR system.  

The Aubaine Navy tends not to station ships in the oceans of Aubaine,
because the noise of the HEPlaR jets, disrupts Schalli communication. 
In extreme need the ships are authorized to venture into the oceans. 
In case this does happens, the ships have a cargo hatch on the floor of
the main cargo bay, this will allow the ship to take on cargo while
under water. Once the door is opened, air pressure will keep the water
from coming in, will act as a bathescape. The cargo bay also can be
pressurized independently of the rest of the ship, this allows Schalli
to enter and exit the cargo bay, without suffering decompression effects.  

General Data				
Displacement: 900 tons				Hull Armor: 100
Length: 36.09 meters				Volume: 12600 m3
Price: MCr 751.7                    Target Size: S
Configuration: SL Box               Tech Level: 12
Mass (Loaded/Empty): 12339.8 / 12063.8				

Engineering Data				
Power Plant: 1196 MW Fusion Power Plant, 0.25 year duration (44.85 m3
fuel)				
Jump Performance: None				
G-Rating: 1G HEPlaR (630 MW/G), Auxiliary High Efficiency CG (90 MW)
			
G-Turns: 36, 78.8 m3 fuel each				
Maint: 432				

Electronics				
Computer: 2xTL-12 Fibre-optic computer (0.8 MW)				
Commo: 2xLaser (Unlimited; 0.3 MW), Maser (Unlimited; 0.6 MW), Radio
(Unlimited; 20 MW)
Avionics: Imaging EMS, IGS positioning, 160 km/h NOE
Sensors: AEMS (10 hex; 27.5 MW), PEMS (4 hex; 0.15 MW), 
ECM/ECCM: EMS Jammer (4 hex;33 MW), EM Masking (12.6 MW)
Controls: Bridge with 24 bridge workstations, 13 normal workstations

Armament
Offensive: 100 Ton Missile Bay 10 Launchers w/100 ready missiles.(3.25
MW;            1 crew)
           10x 95 Mj Laser Turrets(26.4 MW; 10 crew) ROF=100, 
           10:1/8-24 20:1/4-13 40:1/2-7 80:1/1-3
Defensive: Meson Screen Generator (PV=353; 49.8 MW; 1 Crew), 5xSand
Turret (1 MW; 1 crew), 200 AEMS Decoys, 200 PEMS Decoys
Master Fire Directors: 13xTL-12 (4 Diff Mods; 10 hex; Msl 10 hex; 3.1 MW; 1 crew)

Accommodations
Life Support: Extended (0.3858 MW), Gravitic Compensators (9.645 MW)
Crew: 59 (1xManeuver, 2xElectronics, 13xEngineer, 29xGunnery,
5xMaintenance, 1xSteward, 8xCommand)
Crew Accommodations: 35xSmall Stateroom (0.5 kW)
Passengers: None
Passenger Accommodations: None					
			
Other Facilities: Electronics Shop (0.6 MW), Machine Shop (1 MW),
4xEmergancy Low Berth (2 kW)					
			
Cargo: 297.5 m3 (21.3 tons), 2 Large Hatches, 255 missiles in magazine
								
Small Craft and Launch Facilities: 1x25-ton minimal hangar	
							
Air Locks: 9									

Notes									
Total Fuel Tankage: 2879.85 m3 (205.7 tons) 			
					
Fuel scoops (40% of ship surface), fills tanks in 0.14 hours	
							
Fuel purification machinery (4.2MW), 24.68 hours to refine 2879.85 m3.
								
0.7 MW 

								 

T4 Starship Data						
Chimera Missile Boat						
						
Tons: 900 (Box SL)          Volume: 12600 m3            Cost: 751.704 MCr
Crew: 59                    High/Mid Pass: 0            Low Pass: 0
Cargo: 21.25 tons           Controls: Fib(Bridge)       TL: 12

8 Size                      0 Jump drive			
4 Fire Control              1 Maneuver (HEPlaR, 630 MW)			
10xLaser turrets 10:1       2.7 Power Plant (1196 MW)			
1 Missile Bay 100 (355)     205.7 Fuel (Scoop 1440, Refine 8.3)			
                            8 Meson Screen (49.8436 MW)			
                            5 Sandcasters (50 cans)			
1xminimal hangar (25-ton)   0 Nuclear Damper			
                            10A 4P 4J Sensors/EM Masking			
                            30 Armor, 11 Structure			

Crew: 1 Maneuver, 2 Electronics, 13 Engineer, 29 Gunnery, 5 Maintenance, 
      1 Steward, 8 Command			
Accom: 35 small staterooms, 4 emergency low berths, 			
Average density: 1 ton/m3.			
 

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 16:58:34 -0400
From: "Glenn Crawford" <glennc@nelvana.com>
Subject: Brawling vs Martial Arts

IMO, there is a simple solution, change the skill name to unarmed combat and
for role-playing purposes (and occasional bonuses in other endeavours) ask
the player to name the skill. 

eg. player picks boxing, and is being tortured by police beating him. Make
the task a strength + boxing (ie knows how to take a punch, and can keep
going). It may also count as athletics for endurance (few sports require as
much endurance as one in which you are constantly moving and being
bludgeoned if you do not)
Player picks jai-jitsu (or however you spell it), could get an increased
bonus on defence, decreased on attack.
Player picks pankration (sp?) and can actually do more damage with his fists
but his defence is next to nothing (it was considered cowardly to dodge)
whirrrrrrr.....(sarcasm generator active)
Player picks ching-chunk and GM slaps him upside the head for being a
smartass
Player picks (name an oriental martial art) and expects to be able to walk
on rice paper with no trace

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 14:11:29 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: Re: Event Horizon

Are you sure you aren't dropping a meter-to-km factor?

>If we assume that it is an 8 hour
>trip to Jupiter (about 5 AU) then at constant acceleration, it's about
>.36 g. Low, but not *that* low. 

This seems low; 8 hours at 0.36 G (one-way, not turn-around) is 
(0.5 * 0.36 * 10 * (8*3600)^2 = 1.5x10^10m = about a tenth of an AU.

>Well, energy wise, a zero-g bed is *expensive*. It's equivalent to
>hauling a person 1000 miles straight up against a 1 g field (or
>boosting them to escape velocity). It also gets nasty if the person
>slips out of the bed's "field", as they'll *regain* all that energy as
>kinetic energy. Which results in an interesting display as they turn
>into a meteor inside the confines of their bedroom.

There's no particular evidence that Traveller grav technology works this
way (or that any grav tech would have to.) There's lots of ways to get
into "zero-G" without getting to escape velocity. For example, step out a
second-story window and you're in free fall, albeit briefly, without much
energy cost. A zero-G bed just has to be a region of locally flat spacetime
which (while currently impossible) shouldn't particularly require any extra
energy. (Moving an object within the field shoudl require energy due to 
conservation of energy - the field has to provide the energy the object will
regain when it exits the field - but those are small numbers.) 

Bruce

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 14:21:59 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: Re: RoM/Terran TL

I assume the AHL reference is the scenario in which the Solamani try to capture
a disabled AHL-class. The text clearly implies (a) the TL-14 AHL original
configuration is state of the art Imperial for the time of the Rim War, and
(b) the Solomani thought that this TL-14 ship was worth capturing for the
sake of its technology (even a solomani propoganda document talks about how
advanced it is!) To me, this clearly implies that the Imperium was TL-14 at
the time of the Rim War, and that the Solomani were less advanced (whether 
mostly TL-13 or TL-14 can be argued about.) 

Leroy also writes
> Agreed!  In fact, since you know how hard fighting the Solomani were, it is
> also reasonable to assume that both Imperial and Solomani TL15 regulars were
> left out of the fight because they were heavily casualty prone from recent
> fighting.  Remember that the seige of Earth is one of the _last_ events of
> the war.  The Solomani units are probably just home guard reserves that they
> had to drum up to defend Earth.

Which probably isn't true. The invasion of Earth was the single most important
ground battle the Imperium had to fight during the war - and one they nearly
lost; if the Imperium had TL15 troops available in significant quantities they
would have deployed them. (If invading the enemy capitol - especially one 
charged with emotional symbolism - isn't what you're saving your first-line
troops for, what *are* you saving them for?)

In the Solomani case, they didn't expect to
deliberately abandon Earth; and they're unlikely to have sufficient transport
available after losing whatever naval battle it was to evacuate their troops
(the TL-15 ones you suggest) from Earth - especially since they would have had
to evacuate all the native Terran ones as well as whatever mobile forces
they had. It's certainly normal assumption that planetary forces are the
same TL as the world as a whole (see FFW), and pretty clear that the 
Solomani are unlikely to have had enough transport to move all the earth-TL
troops off of Earth. It's very clear from looking at both games that the
Solomani are intended to be TL13 or 14, no higher - Leroy's case is much
weaker even than his arguments about the Rule of Man.

(Does anyone with access to Supplement 10 remember if there were any TL-15
worlds on the Solomani side of the border even in 1107?)

Bruce

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 00:28:17 +2
From: "RFXn" <mlaakso@utu.fi>
Subject: Re: RoM Tech! (the undead beastie rears its head again!)

On 19 Aug 97 at 18:18, Andrew Boulton wrote:

> Agreed. There are people who play using the GURPS mechanics, or a
> variation of RuneQuest system, but they're still playing Traveller.

	Man, am I glad to hear that! *grin*


/RFXn     mlaakso@utu.fi        aka. Matti Laakso
 -Phone: +358-(0)2-237 9928       YO-Kyla 19 A 11
 -IRC: RFXn                       FIN-20540  TURKU
 -Talk: RFXn@delenn.yok.utu.fi    Finland

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 17:34:20 -0400
From: "Glenn Crawford" <glennc@nelvana.com>
Subject: UNanswered

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 04:22:50 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: UNESCO develops Jump Drive

In mail you write:
I think that somewhere along the lines someone got their acronyms crossed,
as whatever UN organization is supposed to have developed jump drive had
"Space" as part of the name, and isn't supposed to exist for at least 20
more years!

UNESCO, UNSCA, Uniroyal (okay maybe not them)

Anything the UN does is a joke. An alliance of nations I can believe, most
likely western european and japanese but not the UN. If we depended on the
UN to get things done, they woule be UNdone.

It should be something to the effect of the
US/European/Japanese/Canadian/Australian alliance discovers jump drive and
brings back the info to NATO (which includes 75% of Earth by then)

the UN demands that it should receive control of the new technology and
offers to allow the US back in if it will. The US laughs. NATO prepares,
just in case. A few years later, the UN tries to take charge and manages to
idiotically provoke the Vilani. The war goes very bad for Earth, it looks
very grim, then NATO takes charge and easily defeats the Vilani who use a
similiar system to the old Earth UN

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 14:49:50 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Polito <aspolito@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>
Subject: Re: Event Horizon

> There's no particular evidence that Traveller grav technology works this
> way (or that any grav tech would have to.) There's lots of ways to get
> into "zero-G" without getting to escape velocity. For example, step out a
> second-story window and you're in free fall, albeit briefly, without much
> energy cost. 

umm, sorry.  You are spending all the potential energy you got by climbing
up to the second story in the first place.

Anthony

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 22:19:16 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Gearhead Challenge: More on M-Drives!

Following my queries yesterday as to what can a QSDS ship use as an MDrive
at TL9, I've got another one.

Can a T4 thruster plate ship travel between an outer gas giant and an inner
planet with the fall of in drive efficiency?  Are the calculations in the
T4 rules wrong, as they assume constant acceleration to mid-point, and then
constant deceleration to 'rest' at target world. If the T-plates fall off
mid-way this will effect travel times detrimentally...

TIA

Dom

PS thanks for the answers on the Bloodwell and Regina Down.



- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"Omnia Mutantur Nihil Interit"  -  Sandman 'The Wake'
"Everything Changes, but nothing is truly lost" 

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 22:12:43 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Ruie/Regina

Someone asked about Ruie/Regina and why it wasn't part of the Imperium.

Referencing the Spinward Marches Campaign and the Regency Sourcebook gives
details that the system was settled around the same time as Regina (75 ?)
and had a strongly isolationist culture. It opted not to join the Imperium
in 235 and remained independent until after Virus was released, when the
Domain military annexed the system as a precaution against Virus.

IIRC Douglas' comments about anarchy and infighting are correct, but I'm
kind of busy just now so I'm not going to look it up, I've a scenario to
write for tommorrow night! ;-)


Q. What border controls do other referee's impose on ships jumping from
Regina to Ruie and back? Me, I fudge it a bit. If the ship travels
regularly, the checks are less stringent (CT period). If it is a one off,
the customs check is thorough to say the least...

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"Omnia Mutantur Nihil Interit"  -  Sandman 'The Wake'
"Everything Changes, but nothing is truly lost" 

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 19:35:21 -0400
From: Thomas Walter Trelenberg <tomt@scri.fsu.edu>
Subject: LaGrange Points

Could some of the more astromonically minded of the TML expain what
Trojan (LaGrange) points are and why everyone wants to put spacestations
there....I've looked in my mechanics books and none of them give a
definition of LaGrange points that really is all that helpful (to me).

Thanks

TT

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 16:48:24 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: Re: alternate tech discussion

On Tue, 19 Aug 1997, Bruce E J Lewis wrote:

> At 04:44 19/08/97 PST, Leonard Erickson wrote:
> >I'd not be surprised to find an 80x86 type chip inside the room
> >thermostat, for instance. :-)
> >
> 	I would. A chip in a control panel would only be part of a system.
> Eventually this would need replacing, say, the wiring, connections, etc...
> and the heaters could wear out thus precipitating renewal of the whole
> system anyway. Most rubbish you buy these days doesn't last five minutes,
> how is any of it supposed to last 100 years!

No one is saying the things last a 100 years, but contol systems built
using time proven designs will be CHEAP, that's REAL CHEAP, folks, to
implement. No one designs a thermostat with a cutting edge RISC chip, just
'cause 6800 chips are obsolete as personal computer CPU (no I didnt
leave off the last 0, I think Moto still makes 'em)

If anything, the fact that stuff doesn't last very long tends to make the
subsystems cheap and similar in construction, since they're designed to be
replaced.
 
> 	As for silicon, I thought scientists had been working on other compounds
> to be used as processor bases for years. A long time ago I heard of a
> substance called gallium arsenide, that is supposed to speed up the
> electron flow, or offer less resistance to it, or something like that.

GaAs chips are used now, for a number of high frequency applications, but
they're more expensive to make, and why do it, just because you can?
Silicon IC's are sheap, well known in their behavior, and for most
applications, plenty fast enough for what they do. Again, you don't need a
GaAs superfast RISC chip to run a thermostat.

> 	Something else I once read about was that instead of the processor having
> a printed electrical circuit, all circuits would in fact be made up of
> millions of tiny laser beams, with light emitters and receivers to act as
> the connections. The advantage of this would be that as light travels much
> faster than electricity - about twice as fast I believe - the beams could
> cross each other without interfering with each other, thus ruling out the
> possibility of a short circuit and enabling all circuit paths to take a
> more direct route, speeding up processing time even more.

Well, it's not that light travels so much faster than electricity, but the
frequency is such that you can make _much_ faster switches, if you have
the basic component design down. 

> 	This would enable a completely different processor architecture to be
> used. It would be very different from a 80x86 type processor.

Absolutely, this is why _computers_ in Traveller are much more powerful
than they are today. But, to belabor a point, that has nothing to do with
embedded controllers...

> 	If we're talking about these things now, then silicon chips will be almost
> unheard of as one approaches the 22nd century. Silicon chips then will be
> as dead as something that is very dead indeed.

Why? Silicon replaced vaccuum tubes for some very important reasons: they
run on much lower power, they are much more rugged, they are enormously
smaller, and they're really cheap to make. New circuit paradigms, such as
optical circuits, will make the processors faster, but not much smaller
(we're already running into quantum tunneling effects in some chip
designs), not much lower power (unless they find a better way to make
led's) and not much more rugged than silicon. So I don't think silicon's
going to go away, unless there are really, really unexpected ways to
fabricate and use these new circuits.

Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 17:01:33 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: Re: Fighters, fatigue, bathrooms, and zero-G beds

On Tue, 19 Aug 1997, Leonard Erickson wrote:
 
> Well, energy wise, a zero-g bed is *expensive*. It's equivalent to
> hauling a person 1000 miles straight up against a 1 g field (or
> boosting them to escape velocity). It also gets nasty if the person
> slips out of the bed's "field", as they'll *regain* all that energy as
> kinetic energy. Which results in an interesting display as they turn
> into a meteor inside the confines of their bedroom.
> 
> On shipboard, for the same reasons that the ship's field doesn't extend
> far, it's much cheaper to turn off the field (actually, since you need
> to keep the inertial compensation, you really set it on "neutral").
> But on planets, you have this *huge* gravity field to fight against.

Leonard, you're right, but I don't think you've actually _seen_ how really
amazingly mindbogglingly knock-your-socks-off _cheap_ energy is in T4 with
the advent of Fusion+. I don't remember if you are in the FFS2 beta gang,
but a minimum size TL-12 Fusion+ plant is only 0.01 m^3, costs 1000 Cr and
puts out 48 KILOWATTS of power continuously. The thing weighs 20 kg, and
occupies a cube 10 _cm_ on a side.

Remember the old aviation engineers claiming they could get a brick
sh*thouse to fly, all they needed was the power?

Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1716
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, August 20 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1717



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Skills and Tech Levels
Re: Event Horizon
Re: Stutterwarp & Heisenberg revisited once again ...
FF&S2 Errata on-line
Re: Trader skill vs Broker skill
Re: Seat Size in FF&S2
Re: Event Horizon
Re: RoM/Terra TL
Re: Is the Kinunir a Cruiser?
Re: Fighters, fatigue, bathrooms, and zero-G beds
Re: Trader skill vs Broker skill
Re: FF&S2 Review (long)
Re: Is the Kinunir a Cruiser?
Re: LaGrange Points
Re: Question for Marc & a second question
Re: Event Horizon

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 20:05:43 -0400 (EDT)
From: fcain@st6000.sct.edu (Franklin W. Cain)
Subject: Skills and Tech Levels

I have a suggestion regarding the idea of labeling Skills with their
associated Tech Level.  

Instead of using the exact Tech *Level*, consider using the Tech Level
*Range*; i.e., "Mechanic/Ind", "Electronics/PreStel", "Computer/HiStel",
etc.  Since the Tech Level Chart lists "bands" or "ranges" for the Tech
Levels *already*, this would sufficiently restrict skills to a TL-range
while still allowing some versatility.  

(BTW, the above example skills were Mechanic for "Industrial" TLs,
Electronics for "Pre-Stellar" TLs, and Computer for "High Stellar" TLs.)  

Comments, anyone?  

Franklin

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 97 19:07:23 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: Event Horizon

On 08/19/97 at 02:11 PM,  bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh) said:


>Are you sure you aren't dropping a meter-to-km factor?

>>If we assume that it is an 8 hour
>>trip to Jupiter (about 5 AU) then at constant acceleration, it's about
>>.36 g. Low, but not *that* low. 

>This seems low; 8 hours at 0.36 G (one-way, not turn-around) is  (0.5 *
>0.36 * 10 * (8*3600)^2 = 1.5x10^10m = about a tenth of an AU.

Gee, but *your* numbers look TOO high. Let me see...it looks like 1.493mk
to me. Isn't that more like a hundredth of an AU?

Eris

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

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 00:09:55 +0000
From: Garry Ward <Garry.E.Ward@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Stutterwarp & Heisenberg revisited once again ...

At 03:02 PM 8/19/97 +0000, Andy Brick    wrote:
>Hi All,
>
>Some time ago, Garry Ward wrote -
>
>> This approach sounds rather more like the Keyhole drives from 
>> FF&S1, only instead of wormholes light years long, lots of 
>> little ones exist that ships can drop thru under the proper 
>> conditions. Handly explains why some deep system probes have 
>> simply disappeared enroute to Mars and beyond. 
>
>Whoah ! What deep system probes have disappeared ?
>
><snip>
>Andy Brick
>exeus@compuserve.com
>http://www.caco.demon.co.uk/
>

One reason that everyone what holding their breath on Sojourner's Mars
landing was that several previous probes just stopped transmitting enroute.
No signal, no sign, nothing.

Garry

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 20:28:47 -0400
From: "Chris Cox" <chriscox@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: FF&S2 Errata on-line

I've started to build an errata list for Fire, Fusion & Steel (T4 Edition)
and have placed it on my web page at "http://users.aol.com/yanbeck/trav.htm".
It includes the missing Table 185: Control System that someone a few days
back was looking for.  Also if anyone knows of any ommisions or errors not on
the list please let me know so that they can be added.  Thanks

Chris Cox
(chriscox@ix.netcom.com)

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 97 19:23:03 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: Trader skill vs Broker skill

On 08/19/97 at 08:28 AM,  Erwin Fritz <efritz@glja.com> said:

>Could some kind soul explain the difference between these
>two skills? I'm playing MT but have seen both. Explanations involving
>other versions of Traveller are welcome too. 

This, of course, is just how I see them. (my standard non-c disclamer ;-)

Broker is the skill of getting the best price when buying or selling a
cargo, ie. "bargaining", "neogotiating", cutting a deal. Trader is the
skill of picking the best cargo to buy and determining the best place to
take it for sale.  

I think there's a need for both.  Some people might be very good at finding
a cargo..Good Trader, but poor at getting a good deal on that cargo...Poor
Broker. Or you might have somebody who is terrible at figuring out where a
good place would be to sell something...Terrible Trader, but great at
getting the best possible price...Great Broker. See, the difference?

The key to making the most profit would be to have a Great Trader team up
with a Great Broker. The Trader finds the cargos and decides where the ship
will fly next to sell them. The Broker negotiates the purchase and sale of
the cargos. And the team gets rich. ;-> 

Does that make sense?


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

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 17:43:00 -0700 (PDT)
From: "John R. Snead" <jsnead@netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Seat Size in FF&S2

"Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net> wrote:

At 01:31 AM 8/19/97 -0700, you wrote:
>>In Table 207 in FF&S2 seats are now back to 1.5 m^3 at the minimum 
>>and 2.5-3.5 m^2 for normal seats.  From doing some measurements I've 
>>done on cars the 1-2 m^3 in CSC makes much more sense.  Why the 
>>change in FF&S2?  
>>Anyone else have reasons?

>Space to moce around in for work and entry/egress.  I'm about 1.65m tall,
>so folding myself into a 1.5m^3 space would be a bit cramped, and difficult
>for me to work in.  I've done it (the driver's space for a M-113A3 isn't
>very big, but I know I suffered a bit in the task rolls.

>Workstations and bridgeworkstations need to be much larger.  If you work in
>a cubicle, measure it out, that's what your workstation and seat should be
>considered as.

The only problem here is that most folks drive cars on a regular basis. 
The workstation in a car is the driver's seat.  This workstation has an
area of at most 1.5 m^3 in many cars, and I've never seen a modern car
with more than 2 m^3.  Given that an air-raft has been defined as gravitic
car, why should their workstations be larger.  Certainly, there are no
automobiles (excluding trucks and buses) on the market with a driver's seat
which has 2.5 m^3 of room. 

Sure, for vehicles folks are planning to work long-term in, like
spaceships, workstation should be larger.  3.5 m^3 is a good minimum, and
7 m^3 seems more likely.  But I'm not talking about starships or
submarines, I'm talking about grav vehicles, commercial automobiles and
all the other short-term use vehicles which have much less space available
in the real world.  I think some errata would be useful on that one. 
 
I'd say for both crewstations and seats, 1.5 m^3 is normal and 
2.5 m^3 is roomy for ordinary short-term use vehicle seats.  


- -John Snead jsnead@netcom.com

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 00:55:29 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: Event Horizon

On Mon, 18 Aug 1997 13:47:51 +0730, Kenji Schwarz wrote:

[ex-cellent review of "Event Horizon" snipped]

Don't hold back, Kenji, tell us what you *really* feel :)

Everyone knows that making a horror movie is a gamble.  The same goes
for science fiction.  Everyone is afraid to dump money in such a
product because the viewing audience is generally narrower than for a
movie that is a bit closer to home (unless it is pure "eye candy" like
ID4).

Combining the two genres was a very brave attempt indeed.  It is too
bad that they couldn't get decent writers for the movie.  When a movie
like "Event Horizon" gets bad reviews-- and it *is* getting bad
reviews-- it just makes it that much harder for the next guy that
comes along that wants to make a SF, horror, or SF/horror movie.



Just a few more points before I go:

Why were the crew breathing normal air/oxygen while immersed in their
fluid-filled grav tanks?  The supposedly 30G of acceleration (from an
ion drive!?!) would have made breathing gas a whee bit difficult.

Why does the pilot continue to move the Lewis and Clark forward
(blind) inside Neptune's atmosphere when ranging information clearly
puts them on a collision course with the Event Horizon?  Lucky thing
they used reverse thrust when they did, eh?

Why does the "gravity drive room" have big spikey bits that could
easily impale you, yet nobody actually gets impaled?  These writers
gotta learn to work with the props department.

Why bother trying to explain something like the "gravity drive" at
all?  The explanation was worse than NOT knowing!  If the drive
generates gravity to bend space, why is Neptune and the ship itself
not effected (all right... there was *some* atmospheric distortion in
Neptune's atmosphere).  The "Event Horizon" should have been in orbit
around Uranus... at least we would have had some butt-hole jokes.

Search & Rescue in the year 2047?  Exactly how many civilian or
commercial space vessels are flying around out there 50 years from
now?  Why is a "search & rescue" ship named after a team of
*explorers*?

When the first crew goes mad, why do they all pose for the bridge
cameras while performing their various atrocities?

Why didn't someone clean up all that guck off the bridge walls?

Why was there a 30-second audible countdown to begin depressurization
inside the airlock if there was no way of overriding it?  Pretty
annoying (kind of like Chrysler's "your door is ajar"-- taken to the
extreme).

With all the ship's power available during the movie ("gravity drive",
artificial gravity, 30G ion drives) why can't somebody rig up a few
more lights so that everything isn't so damn dark (especially in
sickbay)?  How the hell do you perform maintenance or repairs with a 1
Watt light bulb?

Why does a mile-long ship-- "with 15 foot high ceilings"-- suffer
toxic CO2 levels after being inhabited by a crew of eight after only a
few hours?

Exactly how much air (ie: reaction mass) can exist inside a vacc suit
to bring "Mr. Jet-Propelled_Wonder" back after being blasted away from
an exploding vessel?  Why would you design a vacc suit with this kind
of feature anyways?



James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 19:31:31 -0600
From: lwlguatn@ouray.cudenver.edu (Leroy W.L. Guatney)
Subject: Re: RoM/Terra TL

On Tue, 19 Aug 97 18:18 BST-1
aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton) writes:
>Subject: Re: RoM/Terran TL
>
>> Agreed!  In fact, since you know how hard fighting the Solomani were, it is
>> also reasonable to assume that both Imperial and Solomani TL15 regulars were
>> left out of the fight because they were heavily casualty prone from recent
>> fighting.  Remember that the seige of Earth is one of the _last_ events of
>> the war.  The Solomani units are probably just home guard reserves that they
>> had to drum up to defend Earth.
>
>IIRC Earth was packed with everything the Solomani could find. At that time, 
>there were no TL15 Solomani troops.


Then we agree--it is just a matter of whether or not there were TL15 troops
_before_.

Using the same MT source that says RoM was only TL12, the Imperium was TL15
at this time.  Remember also, that Terra (and the Solomani Sphere) were part
of the Imperium up until the Solomani Confederation was founded in 871.  It
is very clear from descriptions that the Imperium and Solomani Autonomous
Region were still close up to this time, yet it still took another century
plus to do something about this "rimward rebellion."

Now if you are telling me that a bunch of Terrans at TL14 can take on the
Third Imperium at one entire tech level disadvantage--well let's just say
that is like the Terrans in their 4900 ton ships taking on 74,900 ton Vilani
ships. (In fact, I would venture a guess that the Vilani would need only
one ship!)  Remember, I just reread the entire Invasion: Earth game, so this
is not IIRC going on here.

BTW, the Vilani even without Meson Guns, just relying upon PA Spinal Mounts
would have to be more moronic than Pakleds to loose to the Terrans, not to
even think about culturally stagnant.

Sorry, but it is clear to me, that Terra was TL15+ at the outset of the
Solomani Rim War, c. 998.

I do thank you for continuing the spirited discussion.  If you want to do
some more CT browsing, reread the piece on the Solomani Movement/Cause in
Alien Module 6: Solomani.

 "That which does not kill us, makes us stronger." -- Nietzsche
                                                    (slightly paraphrased)


>Andrew M J Boulton


Leroy Guatney - lwlg@usa.net
 University of Mars, NorthAm Campus
 Class of '98

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

Date: 20 Aug 1997 02:11:46 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: Is the Kinunir a Cruiser?

>There's probably some good reason for this.(I guess it's something to do with
>the different design methods in CT and MT.) But I have always had trouble
>coming up with a reason why the Kinunir is classed as a cruiser.

When designed, the Kinunir was the largest Traveller ship ever published. 
The Type-C cruiser was 800 tons (hitherto the largest ship designed). 
Remember that the Kinunir was first published in Adventure 1, back before
High Guard and Mercenary (the first rules expansions).  Likewise with the
Gazelle close escort (JTAS 4): the PA barbettes were a new weapon, and very
scary (a single Gazelle could beat 2-3 corsairs in Mayday-style combat).

As the game system evolved ships got larger, but the older designs'
designations weren't changed.  (Well, the Kinunir went from being a Battle
Cruiser to a Colonial Cruiser.)


In one of the TNE novels, a character notes that the Kinunir was useless as a
warchip, but great at threatening relatively defenseless planets from orbit. 

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 04:32:33 +0000 ()
From: kraehe@bakunin.hb.north.de (Michael Koehne)
Subject: Re: Fighters, fatigue, bathrooms, and zero-G beds

Moin Paul D. Owensby,

> This is a reason the staterooms on my ship plans tend to be smaller than the
> usual design, I don't include beds in my deckplans. I can't imagine any 
> culture that has gravitic control as an everyday fact of life not having 
> zero g beds as the norm while planet side.

	human bodys are not build for zero G, you'll either have the
	musle problems because you have variating gravitiy, or even
	more problem if you have low g for most time, when you are
	back in normal g.


- -- 
	kraehe@bakunin.north.de		human.is-bremen.de/~kraehe/traveller
		  " ceterum censeo MSDOS esse delendam "

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 21:01:37 -0600
From: Erwin Fritz <efritz@glja.com>
Subject: Re: Trader skill vs Broker skill

Eris Reddoch wrote:
> 
> Broker is the skill of getting the best price when buying or selling a
> cargo, ie. "bargaining", "neogotiating", cutting a deal. Trader is the
> skill of picking the best cargo to buy and determining the best place to
> take it for sale.
> 

If so, the two skills should have associated tasks. Now, Broker skill
is already covered in the rules regarding Trade and Commerce.

Trader skill, OTOH, by this definition needs a task along the lines
of:

	To find cargo to buy speculatively:
	Routine, Trader, Admin or Strtwse, 14 hrs (safe, unskilled OK).

Now, what happens when this task fails? The person doesn't find 
cargo? Introducing this task sure means there will be less cargo to
be had!

- -- 
Erwin Fritz
Unix/NT/LAN Guy
Gilbert Laustsen Jung Associates Ltd.
http://www.glja.com

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 23:07:04 -0500
From: ghost029@juno.com
Subject: Re: FF&S2 Review (long)

>
>SUMMARY
>	I REALLY CAN'T SAY ENOUGH GOOD THINGS ABOUT THIS SUPPLEMENT.  
>IT 
>IS BETTER THOUGHT OUT, BETTER EXECUTED, AND OF HIGHER QUALITY THAN 
>ANYTHING ELSE PRODUCED FOR T4.  IF YOU WANT TO ADD A RICH TECHNICAL 
>BACKGROUND TO TRAVELLER'S RICH HISTORICAL BACKGROUND, FF&S2 IS AN 
>INVALUABLE BOOK.
>
>
 I concur with this review. I like designing items. I've never had a ship
yet, that was some one elses design that I didn't modify. As for the rest
of the discussion on the worth of the book, I'll use what I want when I
want just like I do with all the supplements.

I just want to thank the following for their hard work 
    David Golden
    Guy Garnett
    Anders Backman
    Merrick Burkhardt
    Leanard Erickson
    George Herbert
    Bruce Macintosh
    Eric Reddoch
    and anyone else involved in the design and production of FF&S2


Thomas Harkless
ex MM!/SS

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 00:28:53 -0400 (EDT)
From: SemoFetus@aol.com
Subject: Re: Is the Kinunir a Cruiser?

>I was reading CT adventure 1 last night, and noticed that the Kinunir class
>ship was called a colonial crusier (or battle cruiser), but it is only 1200 tons.
>Most other cruiser ships I can find are in the region of 50,000 to 100,000 tons
>(mostly from MT books). It's smaller than most escort class ships.

The straight dope on cruisers from CT's "Supplement 9: Fighting Ships":

"Cruisers:  Cruisers are the smallest ships to carry the large spinal weapons
needed to cause serious damage to a large armored ship, although most are too
lightly armored to stand in the line of battle.  They form the cadre of
commerce raiding task forces and provide fire support for planetary
invasions.  Sizes range from 20,000 to 100,000 tons. <there's more but I
digress, this is the meat of the entry>"

>So what class to ship is it?

The straight dope on the Kinunir class is also from "Supplement 9":

"The Kinunir class colonial cruiser (also known by a variety of designations:
vanguard cruiser, battlecruiser, and vanguard escort) is not a true cruiser,
being more properly termed an escort. <again, there's more, but I left it out
for bandwidth>"

>Also the Close Escort ship (in the Imperial Encyclopedia) is far smaller than
>the Escort ships published for MegaTraveller.

The "Fighting Ships" entry on escorts says that "escorts are small ships of
up to 5,000 tons".  In addition, the FS entry on the close escort says:
"Hundreds of Gazelle class close escorts have been built and many remain in
service with the Imperial Navy, despite the fact that in a combat situation,
they are nearly worthless.  The close escort, even when new, was not intended
to stand up to combat vessels; rather it was envisioned as an anti-piracy and
revenue patrol ship.  In that role, it has performed well, but when pressed
into combat duties it has invariably suffered disproportionate losses".

Um...  So there you have it.  I guess that answers some of your questions,
sort of?  When the Kinunir adventure came out, Traveller was still extremely
young.  There weren't a ton of ships to measure the Kinunir against, so it
was made into a "colonial cruiser".  The Traveller vision of ships was
probably much smaller back then.  Later, as the universe expanded, ships got
bigger.  The inconsistency has been there ever since...  

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 23:37:12 -0500
From: deadeye@ebicom.net
Subject: Re: LaGrange Points

Thomas Walter Trelenberg wrote:
> 
> Could some of the more astromonically minded of the TML expain what
> Trojan (LaGrange) points are and why everyone wants to put spacestations
> there....I've looked in my mechanics books and none of them give a
> definition of LaGrange points that really is all that helpful (to me).
> 
> Thanks
> 
> TT


These are  points in a two body gravity system where stability results. 
There are five classical points- L4 and L5 forward of and trailing the
"moon" in the Earth planetary system, and L1, L2 and L3 at other
places.  L4 and L5 are positivly stable- if you place an object there
then move it away it will tend to fall back into position.

L1, L2, and L3 are only about neutrally stable.  An object will stay
until you displace it a bit, then it will drift.  

A little real evidence for the existence of these points are Jupiter's
so called "Trojan points", trailing and preceding the orbit of Jupiter
around the sun by 60 degrees.  There be rocks there.  60 degrees at
Jupiter's orbit is a lot of space, which is why it was silly to see
Jupiter from its Trojan in S:AAB.

Note that Earth Moon Sun is three body.  And Mars, Jupiter Saturn etc.
The real math is tres complique with more than about two bodies(little
francais there.)  If you want I'll crack open some books and give you
some tasty derivations.  I know how you all like scrumptious
derivations.  And tables.

                               o moon
                    L4    60 d  |   60d      L5
                               | 
                               |
                                O earth

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 21:39:37 -0800
From: Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca>
Subject: Re: Question for Marc & a second question

>>>I do not have the T4.1 chargen rules. Do they address this problem?<<
>
>Yes they do. They tell how to roll dice and generate characters. The problem
>of players generating an FFFFFF is addressed by the real world laws of
>probability. For a player to generate a character who begins with AAAAAA or
>better is less than 0.002% (maybe 1 in 3 billion). For the other 2 billion
>tries players make, the characters are balanced.

Right. I deserved that. Munchkin Powergamer (UPP FFFFFF) is hyperbole used
by posters to illustrate some particular design issue or play style, and
not a real character that we have in our games (or would allow). I, and
others, are guilty of using him as the reductio ad absurdum against rules
or play styles which we disagree with.

However, the fact that Mr. Powergamer doesn't really exist does not
invalidate arguments that use him to make a point. The point I was trying
to make is the imbalance between characters with widely different
characteristics.

Now, I know in real life characters having the same skill can have widely
different target numbers. The trouble starts when players roll these
imbalanced characters. For every AAAAAA (or 7B7777, which happens a lot
more often than 1 in 2 billion tries) somebody rolls, someone else rolls a
444444 (or 737777). The way the task system works, the first character is a
superstar who regularly succeeds Impossible task rolls, while the second
character is hard pressed to succeed an Average one. These characters are
not balanced. Since character generation gives everyone the same chance to
boost charactersitics, this imbalance gets preserved in the game. Now in an
ideal game the players would happily contribute whatever their characters
are able to without worrying about what other players contribute. In the
real world, however, most players who roll shmucks sit fuming while those
who got lucky rolls in chargen just beat them in everything. I almost had a
player quit my campaign because of this.

Another problem is, if players can choose which skill table to roll
against, the tendency to roll disproportionately on the physical and mental
development tables in an attempt to maximize their characteristics. Now
some posters have called this "abusive", but is it any more abusive than
minimaxing their weapon dice or cargo capacity to gain the greatest
relative advantage? Even supposing it is, isn't it better to have the rules
thwart this kind of munchkinism rather that relying on the referee to
handle it on an ad hoc basis? And for those players who rolled poor
characteristics, I think there should be some way for them to make up their
initial handicap.

I do not have the T4.1 chargen rules. My post was a sincere (if perhaps ill
phrased) question as to whether the T4.1 rules dealt with what I felt were
problems in T4 chargen. It was not a dig against Marc, who in my opinion
has gone beyond the call of duty in soliciting feedback on Traveller.

This time, instead of complaints, here some suggestions I think would
address the imbalance I see in character generation:

* Change the task system so skills have a more significant role in success.
I know there was a big flamefest about this, and that it isn't going to
happen in T4.1, but it made a difference in my campaign and still think it
is useful to mention as an optional rule.

* Use troupe-style roleplaying, where each player gets to run several
characters (including GM characters). I am trying this in my campaign, and
it makes a huge improvement. Not only does everyone get a chance to play a
superstar (and a shmuck), but it gives me and the players a lot more
freedom. Players can choose what character they will bring into each
encounter and don't get as upset when their character dies. I can run
adventures where different things are happening at the same time and don't
have to rationalize why everything always happens to the same 4 guys. After
trying this I wouldn't go back to one character per player.

* Make characteristic increases harder for higher characteristics. This
would allow low-rolling characters to improve themselves without letting
the high-rollers turn themselves into demigods.

* Add some bad results to the physical and mental development tables to
provide a little negative reinforcement to rolling on them. For example, I
have never had a player roll on the T4 Scholar Physical development table.
The power gamers quiver in fear when they see that "-1 Dex" on the table.

* Add some more skills. The decision point for minimaxers whether to roll
on the development table or a skill table is whether they have enough level
1 skills or not. By having a finer granularity of skills Mr. Powergamer
will have to spend more rolls getting the skills he wants. Actually, the
existing skill tables aren't bad for this; there are a lot of different
combat skills needed to become a battle studmuffin. Marc was wise to
eliminate Combat Rifleman skill. I just wish there was a better selection
of science and technician skills. However, the mental development tables
aren't as generous so this isn't as much as a problem, and it seems to me
the power gamers aren't as interested in science skills... strange.

* Use a points-based chargen system where players all get the same amount
of points to allocate to characteristics instead of rolling 2D6. Even if
you do this you will probably have to do something to the physical and
mental tables. Personally, I find these systems too complicated but they
are popular.

I think any one of these ideas would improve the imbalance I found in T4
chargen. I don't know how applicable they are to T4.1 because, again, I
don't have the rules.

- --
Richard Hough
rdhough@orca.bc.ca

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 22:09:15 +0800
From: kenji@accessone.com (Kenji Schwarz)
Subject: Re: Event Horizon

Stuff below that might be "spoiler" info to some folks.  Snide, in any case.







Leonard Erickson wrote:

>Let's see... Neptune is about 30 AU out. That's about 4.5e9 km. or
>2.25e9 to turnover if we assume constant acceleration. 28 days to
>turnover is 2.4e6 seconds. Plug in the formulas and I get around
>8/100ths of a gee. Boy, they really need those G tanks. :-)
>(But it isn't *too* unreasonable for an ion drive!)

Well, *I*'m blushing!  Guess I blamed the gearheads a little too soon for
the 30G ion drive <G>.  Mea culpa, mea magna culpa.  I was, though, more
impressed by the ability of Palmolive and an oxygen mask to keep you fit
and healthy for 56 days at a stretch -- without even giving you pruney
skin!  Wow!  You're soaking in it, dear!

(I had just read Roderick's adventure posts the morning before I saw the
film, and so when the crew started talking about their "grav tanks," I
naturally pictured the Famille Spofulam variety, with the TL-9
organ-supporting "smart-gel" applied through a rectal nozzle...  my
sniggering gurgle made the couple sitting next to me move down a seat,
where they stayed happily for the rest of the film.  Yes!  Spofulam, L.I.C.
is scarier than Azathoth! <G>)

>> WHUFFO ol' Justin could go on yacking his damn-fool head off in an airloc=
k
>> that was 20perfreakincent decompressed?
>
>20% decompressed is just "high mountain" equivalent. 12 psi of air, and
>around 3.6 psi of oxygen. Not a problem.
>
>Now if it was decompressed *to* 20% (rather than *by* 20%) it's a
>different story. 3 psi total, .9 psi oxygen results in rapid
>unconciousness unless you were born in the Andes or Himalayas.

Yep, my misstatement -- the airlock was decompressed to 20% and his veins
were popping out and he could still talk just fine.  Got a good voice
coach, one presumes.

>> WHUFFO the Jet-Propelled Wonder
>> can shout howdy into his vacc suit outside the ship's window and they can
>> hear him?  Is the atmosphere of Neptune "A"-class or WHAT?  Exotic, my
>> alveoli.
>
>Was his helmet againt the window? If so you can get conduction thru the
>glass.

Yeah, maybe that's it; still, my guess is it's more like a case of
conduction through a tepid plasma of bullshittium.

>> WHUFFO the forces of "ultimate chaos and ultimate evil" can't think of
>> nothing naughtier than face-slashing and evsiceration?
>
>Because then they'd have to rate the film X!

Oh, come on, now!  Chairman Bill is on TV all the time -- and they
broadcast that simpering purple demon-lizard from the Jurassic during peak
viewing hours for small children!!!  You really expect me to believe they
were afraid of an X rating?

BTW, what does it mean that the filmmakers spared us no sight of blood,
shattered bones, exploding frozen corpses, gouged-out eyesockets, fresh hot
entrails, frisky maggots=81 and burn tissue, but took care that the luscious
centerfold model (used by the Mad Scientist to illustrate his somewhat
buggy warp drive) was demurely clad and street-legal?  That the only
R-rated nudity was a Clockwork Orangian shot of some bruised and
waterlogged satanic hallucination?  What sort of message is this sending
the young generation of gearheads? <G>.

I'll tell you what:  the entire movie's a bit of Vilani cultural
propaganda.  Blatant allegory.  Solitary megalomaniac scientist neglects
social bonds (wife kills herself), then constructs a huge expensive
spaceship using totally untested technology based on principles he admits
he doesn't understand; the testing of this new technology -- during which
he refuses to cooperate with his teammates -- nets out with the destruction
of two spaceships and their crews, and "opens up a gateway into a dimension
of total chaos and evil" (sic.!)  Was this film written by Vilani patent
lawyers, or what?

In fact, we should re-evaluate *all* those luddite-flavored novels and
films for signs of Vilani tampering!  I think it must have started in the
early 1800s; the Vilani were concerned about the spread of
industrialization and a global econmic system, and so created the Romantic
movement... Mary Shelley was clearly an alien spy.  Tuberculosis became
fashionable because all the highly-placed Vilani infiltrators were coming
down with it.  In a broader view, the Taipings were all too obviously an
experiment in social engineering that went awry.  Queen Victoria, given her
suspiciously long life, had probably been abducted and replaced by a Vilani
plant...

Kenji Schwarz
kenji@accessone.com

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1717
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, August 20 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1718



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: zero-G beds
Re: Zero-G beds
Re: RoM/Terra TL
Sex in zero-G (was: Re: Zero-G beds)
Vehicle for T4: Rover
Re: UNESCO....
Re: E21 Chronology
T4.1 Chargen, Skills, & Task Chapter
Re: Is the Kinunir a Cruiser?
Re: Task Chapter: Comments, Observations, Questions
Re: Brawling vs Martial Arts skill
Re: Question for Marc & a second question
Re: Trader skill vs Broker skill

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 21:21:58 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Re: zero-G beds

Glenn Hoppe wrote

> Peter Newman wrote:
> > 
> > Paul D. Owensby wrote
> > 
> > [snip]
> > > In addition, physical fatigue would be reduced greatly by just    > > > having what- ever internal gravity there may be switched off.
> > > This is a reason the staterooms on my ship plans tend to be > > > smaller than the
> > > usual design, I don't include beds in my deckplans. I can't > > > imagine any
> > > culture that has gravitic control as an everyday fact of life not > > >  having zero g beds as the norm while planet side.

> [snip again]
> 
> > How about simply using gravity control to move the bed into the ceiling
> > when it is not in use and letting it descend when needed.
> 
> Why bother?
> 
> I think that gravitic control would be something that would be kept
> under central control of the captain and crew. It seems to me that it
> would be a breach of security to allow passengers access to gravity
> controls, even at a localized level.
> 
> Why waste power on manipulating bed gravity when space could be
> conserved by simply having beds that fold down from the walls or recess
> into the floor?

Because modern scientific evidence has shown that zero gravity for 24
hours a day is unhealthy.  I think that it is quite possible that zero
gravity for 8 hours a day is also unhealthy.  In the abscence of real
world data indicating otherwise I do not see any reason to assume that
zero gravity beds will catch on as I think it is likely they will be
unhealthy.
> 
> I'm sure advances in materials and ergonomic design will allow future
> travellers to sleep in comfort on a few centimeters of SleepWell(tm)
> Narcoplast pressure responsive sleep surface that folds down from the
> wall.
> 
> ADVERTISING BLURB:
> 
> Discriminating captains know that passengers accept nothing less than
> SleepWell(tm) Narcoplast sleeping surfaces!

On the other hand this is a great advertising blurb and it is almost
worth assuming zero gravity beds to have this set up.  I am not
technologically conservative in general, I think that in the future
people will do some everyday things vastly differently than we do today.

However - I do not think that being in zero gravity unnecessarily is
medically prudent.  Having the beds pop into the ceiling saves space
(usefull) but does not require zero gravity sleeping (unhealthy till
proven otherwise).

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 01:48:38 -0400
From: "Paul D. Owensby" <pauld@athens.net>
Subject: Re: Zero-G beds

Hoo, wee! If you want to get a good response from the folks on this 
list, hit 'em where they live: sleep and sex. If I could just get food into
this I'd have everything: With zero-G beds, you ain't got no cookie
crumbs to brush off the sheets! :)

>What about the negative medical effects of zero gravity.  Do you think
>it would be a good idea to have zero gravity beds everywhere ? 
>Cannonically Traveller has (at TL 9) anti bone degeneration drugs
>(mentioned in CT's Beltstrike IIRC) but if everyone is using zero
>gravity beds they may need to be taking this drug.

And indeed they may well be. In my campaign, all Travellers are taking
"space drug" as a matter of course (it's included as a supplement in their
food) to ward off the effects of zero-g, jump space, motion sickness, and
a myriad of other space-occupational hazards, kind of like we consume
a variety of additives in our food and water without thinking of them, like 
fluoride, vitamin enrichments, and the thought-control drugs dumped in
our reservoirs by the black U.N. helicopters :) Not Canon, of course, but
how I do it.

>On the other hand it is quite possible that 8 hours a day of zero G has
>none of the negative effects that 24 hours a day zero gravity does.

I'd be interested in knowing if anyone has done any work on this...maybe
using floatation tanks? I know there was a study I saw on the Discovery
Channel where a group of volunteers spent a long time (a month or more)
lying in floatation tanks and developed much the same problems as astro-
nauts do after similar periods in zero-g; I wonder if they've examined the
effects of shorter, daily periods? Anyone know, or can guess where to
start looking?

>In addition their are certain other activities one can do in bed that
>may be somewhat more difficult in zero gravity as the participants may
>have difficulty remaining in contact.  I have heard rumors that certain
>space shuttle astronauts might have a first hand answer to this
>question, can anyone out there confirm this ?

This I've been curious about as well, but for some reason the space 
agencies have been strangely silent. If they'd just give the public some
hard info on this, we might see a Renaissance in interest in space travel :)
I wouldn't think it should be too terribly different from certain activities
being performed in water; it would have its advantages and disadvan-
tages, just like doing it with gravity.

>How about simply using gravity control to move the bed into the ceiling
>when it is not in use and letting it descend when needed.

Perfectly valid, I just stated how things are done on *my* ships as a 
general rule. YMMV, as in the next post about the subject:

>Surely there would be people who just weren't comfortable with that.
>(However prevalent gravitic control might be).  Or, indeed, can't/won't
>afford it.  Indeed there may be people who prefer *more* gravity for
>sleeping (or whatever) and are going to want specialised mattresses to
>support them.

I agree with the points you make, it's just my personal feeling that the
majority of the people would prefer it; I've read where several astro-
nauts described it as the most peaceful sleep they've ever known. I'm
very much a protege of Louis Wu, in that a) I've taken a vow never to
die :) and b) would be so used to gravless sleep plates that I would 
have a difficult time sleeping in gravity

>My *impression* in Traveller has never been of space being at a particular
>premium.  Perhaps I'm wrong but I've kind of assumed that even if starships
>don't have quite the space of the, say, Enterprise, they still have a fair
>bit of room for those long weeks in jumpspace not to feel claustrophobic.

And my impression of *most* of the ship designs I've seen (and made) is
that extra crew space gets eaten up in the desire to squeeze as much 
cargo space and as many small staterooms as possible into a ship to 
maximize the profit. I think this would rest just as heavy on the mind of
any ship's captain, given the rather *low* rates that cargo and passenger
service allow under the Imperium, at least. :)

>>(i.e. net) attached to the wall to hold you in place, or at most a type of
>>closet/cubby like some of the shuttle folks sleep in now.
>
>I'm sure some will love that - others might loathe it.  I suspect
>passengers will demand the choice.  Ship captains (or designers) will
>provide it.

Of course--give the people what they want is the first rule of business.
Make the people think they want what you have to give is the second
rule. :) And with that in mind:

FOR GENERAL CORPORATE PRESS RELEASE:

"Ase Civilian Products(tm) is happy to announce their fall line of grav-
beds, the Cloud Nine Series. Designed to give the sleeper maximum 
comfort and safety, the Cloud Nine Series also retains that flair for 
detail that you have come to expect from ACP. 

"With a variety that stretches the limits of the imagination from the retro-
canopied Safari through the minimalist chrome of the Dream Mirror to
the hi tech stylings of the Buckminster, the Cloud Nine line encompasses
something for everyone. And rest assured that the ACP guarantee of
quality is built into every bed with the widest safety margins in the
business in both mass support and anti field slippage features."

THE ASE CIVILIAN PRODUCTS ZERO-G BED (TL12):
(Designed with CSC)
Displacement: 0.2 (USP6)	Vol	    Mass      Area	Cost
Volume:			          2.800m3      --	          --	    --
Configuration: Slab		 --	        --      13.600m2	    --
Dimensions: 2m x 2m x .7m (typical for standard bed shape)
Structural Material: Structurecomp
Chassis: 1g rated		          .048m3     .048t        --	.96KCr
Power Plant:TL12 Stor Bank   .024m3        .12t        --           .288KCr
	produces .0035Mw power for 24 hours
Propulsion*:TL12 Contragrav .02m3 	  .013t	       .02m2      .1KCr
	uses .0035Mw of power for 1t of "thrust"
Total:				          .092m3   .298t        .02m2     1.348KCr

*Used to determine max load of occupants, in this case 1 metric ton.

Voila, a mass produced g-bed for less weight than the typical water
bed and costing much less than your typical PC. The bed's config-
uration can be easily changed due to the very small amount of volume
actually needed, but it's late and I'm too tired to do so right now :)
This was fun enough, that I think I'll do a regular catalog of the beds
and put it up on the Pan-Imperia page; think of them as just the thing
after a hard day's sub-orbital pogoing :)

And this is just with CSC, I can't wait to get my hands on FFS2!

**********************************************************
Paul Darius Owensby (pauld@athens.net)                   
ValuJump Lines:"So Economical, You'll Think You're Part of the Crew" (tm)
Pan-Imperia: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/Paul_Owensby/
Home of ValuJump Lines, Pan-Imperia Shipyards, and Beginnings for DOS.

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 23:59:12 -0600
From: lwlguatn@ouray.cudenver.edu (Leroy W.L. Guatney)
Subject: Re: RoM/Terra TL

On Tue, 19 Aug 1997 14:21:59 -0700
bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh) writes:
>Subject: Re: RoM/Terran TL


Hi Bruce,


>I assume the AHL reference is the scenario in which the Solamani try to capture
>a disabled AHL-class. The text clearly implies (a) the TL-14 AHL original
>configuration is state of the art Imperial for the time of the Rim War, and
>(b) the Solomani thought that this TL-14 ship was worth capturing for the
>sake of its technology (even a solomani propoganda document talks about how
>advanced it is!) To me, this clearly implies that the Imperium was TL-14 at
>the time of the Rim War, and that the Solomani were less advanced (whether 
>mostly TL-13 or TL-14 can be argued about.) 


Thanks, I had not recalled the scenarios as a possible source.  I'll go
back to that one.

BTW, I haven't denied that the AHLs were TL14.  As for the other stuff,
it could be Ministry of DisInformation working again. <G>

The original source quote was rather vague (see my post on it), so I'm
not surprised I missed it.  The more telling is the Invasion: Earth info,
along with the other stuff that should be coming along in my last post.


>Leroy also writes
>> Agreed!  In fact, since you know how hard fighting the Solomani were, it is
>> also reasonable to assume that both Imperial and Solomani TL15 regulars were
>> left out of the fight because they were heavily casualty prone from recent
>> fighting.  Remember that the seige of Earth is one of the _last_ events of
>> the war.  The Solomani units are probably just home guard reserves that they
>> had to drum up to defend Earth.
>
>Which probably isn't true. The invasion of Earth was the single most important
>ground battle the Imperium had to fight during the war - and one they nearly
>lost; if the Imperium had TL15 troops available in significant quantities they
>would have deployed them. (If invading the enemy capitol - especially one 
>charged with emotional symbolism - isn't what you're saving your first-line
>troops for, what *are* you saving them for?)


Well, for the same reasons, if the Imperium _was_ TL15, wouldn't they be
using their TL15 troops.  We could throw out the TL tables of the Imperia
in the much heralded MT Ref's Companion, but that would at the same time,
eject the only direct quote for a TL12 RoM.


>Solomani are unlikely to have had enough transport to move all the earth-TL
>troops off of Earth. It's very clear from looking at both games that the
>Solomani are intended to be TL13 or 14, no higher - Leroy's case is much
>weaker even than his arguments about the Rule of Man.


See last comment directly above.

Also, Invasion: Earth tells of the _massive_ strike by the Solomani against
the Third Imperium's front.  I can see the possibility that Solomani TL15
reserves would be held back, but why not use them if you are making a
gamble.  Yes, it is a gamble.  There are myriads of possibilities, and more
than one _could_ make sense.  (Note the German strategy in WWI. And yes,
they did lose the war. [Sorry about that to my friends and possible relatives
out there on this list.])


>(Does anyone with access to Supplement 10 remember if there were any TL-15
>worlds on the Solomani side of the border even in 1107?)


None whatsoever.  They were all TL14 max.  One world over the border in
Aldebaran sector, adjacent to the Near Bootes cluster was TL15.  That was
in GDW's newsletter "Imperial Lines" #2.

Remember, I'm trying to make sense of the _whole_ published volume of
record.  Admittedly a not too simple task.

For the record, Inv: Earth gives _both_ sides TL14 troops counters.  The
Imperial forces are broken down as to Regulars, Colonials, etc., but no
such distinction is made for the Solomani counters.  (Exactly why I
stated that the claim that Earth was TL13 was, well, an exaggeration.)

As for RoM TL, the little bit of text devoted to TL period in the game
just kind of dances around what TL is, only to really say that TL 12- is
in one category, and TL13+ is in another (for combat purposes).  That is
why I can see TL15 being a possible explanation for the Solomani.

S&A states clearly that the max Solomani TL is 15, an "adjustment" from
CT days.  We also need to factor that in for evaluating CT sources, if
we are going to be precise about this.

As an analysis/strategy point, in response to a my "case being weaker",
I only focused on the Inv: Earth game, since that is the only post-RoM
published source of Terra's TL until 1107/1110.  I:E reinforces the
quote of 1107 Terra's TL being 15, which is about as far as they wanted
to get specific on the subject.

You are right that a strictly CT view of things could suggest that Terra
reached and maintained TL14 until the Imperial TL programs raised it to
15 in the post-War era, not that the Imperium would necessarily want to
rebuild Earth with improvements after the "hell" the Solomani put them
through.


>Bruce
>


Leroy Guatney - lwlg@usa.net
 University of Mars, NorthAm Campus
 Class of '98

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 10:16:44 +2
From: "RFXn" <mlaakso@utu.fi>
Subject: Sex in zero-G (was: Re: Zero-G beds)

	Somehow, I knew it'd come to this. For some reason, (almost) 
all players start asking about zero-G sex at some point. Here's what 
I know of the subject. 

(Some people might consider the following somewhat tasteless.
Consider thyself warned.)

On 20 Aug 97 at 1:48, Paul D. Owensby wrote:

> >In addition their are certain other activities one can do in bed that
> >may be somewhat more difficult in zero gravity as the participants may
> >have difficulty remaining in contact.  I have heard rumors that certain
> >space shuttle astronauts might have a first hand answer to this
> >question, can anyone out there confirm this ?
> 
> This I've been curious about as well, but for some reason the space
> agencies have been strangely silent. If they'd just give the public
> some hard info on this, we might see a Renaissance in interest in
> space travel :) I wouldn't think it should be too terribly different
> from certain activities being performed in water; it would have its
> advantages and disadvan- tages, just like doing it with gravity.

	Actually, I've read some hard info on this from some aviation
magazine years back. It would appear the Russians tried this in the
mid-80s, and turned out to be a disaster. The body movements put the
participants in a spinning motion; I understand the joyful moment
was interrupted by breaking a wrist in addition to bruises and other
painful things. :)

	The Russians then designed a cradle with handholds and straps so 
that two people could have sex in space. Not out of friendlines to 
the lonely cosmonauts, but because the Russian space administration 
had been told to experiment on zero-G breeding and childbirth. I 
assume the experiment failed.

	In a related story (not sure if it's true), in the late 70s there
was a bit of a problem with the cosmonauts' libido. Out of touch
with sexual contact, one astronaut managed to short-circuit some
electronic systems by masturbating. The by-products scattered in
zero-G and wandered among the sensitive electronics, with
predictable results. From then on, Russian astronauts have been 
provided with condoms.

	ObTrav:

To have sex in zero-gravity environment: 
Formidable: End, Zero-G Env (Fateful), 6 minutes

Referee: This task assumes normal heterosexual intercourse. For
oral sex, decrease difficulty by one level. The DMs may optionally
be added to the time roll, thus allowing the PC to either prolong
the task. Failure gives indicated damage in form of bruises and/or 
fractures.


/RFXn     mlaakso@utu.fi        aka. Matti Laakso
 -Phone: +358-(0)2-237 9928       YO-Kyla 19 A 11
 -IRC: RFXn                       FIN-20540  TURKU
 -Talk: RFXn@delenn.yok.utu.fi    Finland

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 00:45:13 -0700
From: "Eric Jackson" <Alric@SpryNet.Com>
Subject: Vehicle for T4: Rover

I'm not positive about some of the math but here is my first foray into
vehicle design. Enjoy.

================================

"Rover" Grav Utility Vehicle, TL-12 (CSC)
Displacement: .4 (USP 5)
Volume: 5.6 m3
Dimensions: 2.75 x 1.43 x 1.43
Structural material: Composite Laminate
Chassis: 7g Rated
Armor: 1cm Composite Laminate 
Armor Rating: 7 on all facing, except top, which is 0
Power plant: TL 12 Fusion+, 0.2 Mw
Fuel Consumption: 0.006 m3 per 100 hours
Fuel: .0094 m3 of Enriched Water (150 hours)
Propulsion: TL12 Contragrav, 25 tons thrust (.175 Mw)
Crew: 1 Driver/Pilot, 1 Passenger
	Crew gets front armor protection only.
Cargo: 4 m3 (2 tons)
Options:
	Sub-Continental Radio-12
	Multi-use Pintel mount
Total Weight: 5.17 tons (loaded), 3.16 tons (unloaded)
Total Cost: 25 KCr
Performance (loaded): Acceleration after gravity 3.8G, Top speed 193 m/turn
(116 kph)
	(Unloaded): Acceleration after gravity 6.9G, Top speed 573 m/turn (345
kph)
Agility: -5 DM to be hit.

Description: 
"EmJ Motors is proud to introduce our new Rover Sport/Utility Vehicle. The
Rover is a compact two-person contragrav car ideal for exploring the
backwoods or cruising down to the corner convenience market."

The Rover has proven to be very popular with the grav car buying public.
It's small size allows it to get close to the ground and still be able to
maneuver around obstacles that larger vehicles would never be able to
traverse.

The Rover has become very popular among police forces on planets with
extensive wilderness and who have no need for heavy armed craft. The Rover
is also popular among prospectors, hunters, scouts, and others who
appreciate its rugged construction and reliable performance. The Rover will
fit in nearly any starship's cargo bay.

The Rover is often used as a light recon vehicle by various armed forces,
this variant usually has some form of squad support weapon mounted on the
multi-use mount, fired by the passenger. Another popular variant is the
hunter's special, which comes with either a tranq rifle or net gun mounted
on the multi-use mount.

This vehicle is basically a flying jeep, think of rat patrol with lasers.

Eric J
Alric@SpryNet.Com
Fuzion Page: http://members.aol.com/rfintnl/

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 04:11:30 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: Re: UNESCO....

Bruce Johnson writes:

>>    Diet Mountain Dew anyone?  :-)
>
>What, and miss out on the sugar buzz...what are you crazy???!! ;-)

   Heck no!  That's what the Rice Krispie Treats are for!  ;-)

Regards,

Harold

P.S.  Meanwhile all our European friends are rolling their eyes at the
crazy American washing down his sugary snack with a diet soda.  Sorry,
it's a cultural thing....

- --h

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 04:04:24 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: Re: E21 Chronology

Hans Rancke-Madsen writes:

>IMO it would be much better just to realize that the Traveller universe is
>not identical to our universe and to simply stick to one timeline once it
>is established. As far as I'm concerned I don't mind gaming in a universe
>where, say, computers didn't develop as explosively as they have done in
>our universe in the past 20 years. Or, in casu, space exploration and
>international cooperation developed much faster than it really did.

   As part of the Canon Orthodoxy around here, my position might seem a
bit hypocritical, but I think you need to disconnect the sequence of
events from a particular set of dates.  This becomes critical when
reality starts to make you look like to total smuck.  Besides, we're
talking Marc Miller's Traveller (not the original), which gives IG an
excuse to do a reality check on the few canon dates that are in near
future.

>Let's do that with Traveller. Otherwise we'll have to keep revising the
>timeline and the tech definitions as the real Earth develop in ways we
>didn't anticipate (and I guarantee you that it will ;-).

   It may be better as someone suggested, to start the background with a
date further out (say 2063, the tradional start date for important
events in sci-fi shows like Star Trek and S:AAB).

Regards,

Harold

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 04:30:38 -0400 (EDT)
From: pawn@CAM.ORG (Glenn Grant)
Subject: T4.1 Chargen, Skills, & Task Chapter

Marc,

A few comments about the T4.1 Chargen chapter - I've only just got around
to playtesting it. I generated a batch of characters, and came up with the
following thoughts. Note: you sent me the draft chapter some time in late
June; no doubt it has changed a lot since, so some of these comments may be
obsolete.

On the Chargen Checklist, under "Roll for Injury", it says: "If an injury
occurs, roll one half-die for the years served. Resolve that number of
years, and proceed to Muster Out." This conflicts with the Injury &
Recovery rules, which state that leaving the service when Injured is
non-mandatory.

Under "Roll for Commission", you should explicitly state what it means to
receive a commission. Non-military types such as myself might not know that
it means "promotion to Rank 01 (or Rank 04 if current rank is E7+)".

Also, when a character enters a service after OTC or NOTC, does she
automatically get a commission (and the skill roll that goes with it)?
Perhaps she should become an NCO until she rolls a commission? Or is that
not how it works? The Eneri example seems to suggest that he automatically
received a commission, and the extra skill roll, when he enlisted after
OTC. But this is not stated explicitly.

On the Checklist, under "Aging", it says "At the end of each term
(beginning with term 6), determine the effects of aging..." But different
characters will reach term 6 at different ages: not every character enlists
at age 18. This should say something like: "When the character reaches age
34: at the end of that term, and the end of every subsequent four-year
period, determine the effects of aging..."

Heroism Awards: I think that each Heroism Award should provide a one-time
DM on the next roll for Promotion: +1 for an MCUF, +2 for MCG, and +3 for
SEH.

Some of the "Mustering Out Benefits" tables have a seventh item, but I see
no text explaining the +1 modifier (usually applied if the character has
Gambling, IIRC).

What is Concealment skill, and how is it different from Camouflage?

Heh. Under "Entertainers", I notice that achieving Acting-10 means you're a
"Star Actor" and gets you a big wad of cash. Same goes for Writers,
Musicians, and Dancers. Hmm... I guess achieving Artist-10 just means you
go mad, lose all your friends, and starve to death in a garrett...? ;)

In the Navy "Physical" table, I note "Forward Observer". This is a Physical
Development skill? Strange. Why not "Knife" or "Blade Combat" as in the
other fighting services?

All in all, the character generation system is excellent. I found it very
difficult to intentionally produce monster geek characters (without fudging
lots of rolls). Once a character starts aging, you can just about keep
their physical stats at roughly the same level by concentrating rolls on
the Physical table -- but after age 50 this doesn't work any more. 

I find that you have to consciously work at building up a specialization
skill or two, by concentrating a lot of rolls on one or two specific
tables. If you follow the rules strictly (no picking skills, except in
school) you can generally build up only one skill to a level of about 5 or
6, if your lucky. And that's after University, Grad School x 2, plus six or
seven career terms! Characters who wash out of a career after only two or
three terms are going to be pretty useless (unless they chose a worthwhile
major in school and took a Masters at least), with maybe one skill at level
3 and a bunch at 1 or 2.

I notice that non-academic skills, such as weapons skills, are very hard to
pump up to 'professional' levels (6+ or so?) -- unless you geek out and
roll continuously on one table for several terms. Which, I suppose, is
intentional, and somewhat realistic.

Entertainers and Scholars seem to have the best chance of pumping more than
one skill up to a high level, because they can choose to push up their
specialty/major - though only as high as their highest non-specialty skill.
(I note that Scholars can cheat by repeatedly returning to school and
pushing a Major skill up to six levels, then returning to their career and
matching that skill with their chosen career Major. Repeat process until
total geekdom is achieved.)

I wonder if all careers shouldn't have similar 'specialization skills',
such as those of the Entertainer and Scholar, which can be chosen instead
of rolled, so long as some other skill is at an equal level. I think it's a
good idea for each character to have one or two specialties that makes him
or her uniquely useful to the group. You would still have to geek out on
one table to push up that secondary specialty, so that you can choose
higher levels for your main specialty.

Re: the Task Chapter:

As for the Task System, I think that the probabilities are a bit high for
my tastes, and (like many others on the list) I don't care for that
half-die. I suspect I'm going to use a straight 1D thru 6D progression (and
7D for 'Hopeless' tasks, I guess).

To compensate for the higher dice codes, I will probably double the number
of Homeworld skills, and find other ways to ensure that all characters have
one or two skills at level 7+, and three or four skills at about 5. This
should also help to further balance the stat:skill ratio, which still seems
somewhat low to me in T4.1.

But the system as designed will work okay - even if some players are going
to gag on that half-die. It's certainly a vast improvement over T4.

Well, that's all for now. Will send more comments as they occur to me.

Best,

 + GMG +

    -----------------------Glenn Grant-----------------------  
                         <pawn@cam.org>
    Web: <http://helios.physics.utoronto.ca:8080/ggrant.html>
"Nature abhors normality. It can't go too long without a mutant."
                        --Dr Blockhead

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 05:17:39 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Is the Kinunir a Cruiser?

In a message dated 97-08-19 10:55:54 EDT, you write:

<< 
 Anybody got any good ideas on this?
  >>

The Kinunir is a Colonial Cruiser. For ego purposes, some people call it a
Battle Cruiser. At 1200 tons, the ship is relatively tiny.

Kinunir was designed before High Guard, and before Traveller started having
rather big ships in it. 

Marc

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 05:17:39 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Task Chapter: Comments, Observations, Questions

In a message dated 97-08-19 07:31:26 EDT, you write:

<< Comment: Drop the half die for difficult tasks.  If a half die was used
     more extensively in the game system, I would say keep it, but if it
     is only going to be used for difficult task resolution, drop it and
     make the progression a smooth one from 1D to 6D.
  >>

But in T41 the half die is used more extensively in the game system.

Marc

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 05:17:36 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Brawling vs Martial Arts skill

In a message dated 97-08-19 15:26:39 EDT, you write:

<< 
 My question is this: what are the effects of having two different
 skills for these abilities in combat? Is there a situation where
 Brawling-2 is better or worse than MA-2?
 
  >>
That, of course, is the challenge... as I approach the combat rules. My
intention (not having yet reviewed the combat rules in depth as yet) is to
rewrite combat as a task based activity which differentiates between the
various skills.

Marc

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 05:17:35 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Question for Marc & a second question

In a message dated 97-08-19 06:46:31 EDT, you write:

<< 	if you still have a "select dice from a pool" option, its
 	still quite easy to have a high stat, or else unbalanced
 	character for powergamers. I would advise to spilt the one
 	big pool into several smaller ones :
=20
  >>

That option has been eliminated. It is too prone to abuse. If a player wa=
nts
an FFFFFF character the the game master will allow it, then OK. Otherwise.


Text form T41 Chargen

Ways To Roll Dice
	Although there are many schools of thought on how dice should be rolled,=
 the
Traveller game system embraces only three for character generation:
traditional rolls, the pre-rolled sequence, and the specific manipulated =
die
roll.
	Traditional Rolls. As the player creates his or her character, the corre=
ct
number of dice are rolled at the moment the result is required. That resu=
lt
is used, and it cannot be changed or re-rolled.
	Pre-Rolled Sequence. Before the character generation procedure is starte=
d,
the player rolls the dice quite a few times and records the results in or=
der.
The player should roll the half die at least 20 times, a single die at le=
ast
40 times, and two dice at least 50 times.
	During character generation, the player selects the next die roll on the
list and uses it. Because the player can make decisions, the player is
allowed, within the context of the rules, to select what roll is next to =
be
made and can search out options within the rules for the best use of that
roll.
	Manipulated Die Rolls. In some situations, a player=92s goal is a very
specific result: a character of a specific age, or in a specific career, =
or
of a specific rank. In such situations, the player can manipulate the
required die rolls in order to achieve such a result.
	When the player is creating a character to be used for adventuring, the
manipulation of die rolls should be coordinated with the game master in o=
rder
to verify that they are legitimate.

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 05:17:32 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Trader skill vs Broker skill

In a message dated 97-08-19 16:47:06 EDT, you write:

<< 
 Could some kind soul explain the difference between these
 two skills? I'm playing MT but have seen both. Explanations involving
 other versions of Traveller are welcome too. 
 
 I may just combine the two into one if I can't come up with a
 justification for having them separate.
  >>

	Broker is a Business skill regarding the marketing of goods, and represents
an understanding of the business of buying and selling. A broker acts as an
agent for the owner of goods (and may act for himself); when the sale takes
place, the broker receives a commission. A broker receives a commission of 5%
per level of skill (to a maximum of 20%).

	Trade and Commerce. Broker skill is used in the Trade and Commerce process.

	Broker is one of two members of the Business skill cluster (the other is
Trader). Trader enables a character to accurately estimate the true value of
merchandise.
	Broker is a default skill (and at Broker-0 allows an individual to make a
deal; it is not enough to allow a commission).

Brokers can influence consultations of the Actual Value Table, but must be
paid a commission. Brokers, however, vary in quality and availability by
starport.

Broker	Starport	Mod	Comm
Broker-4	A	+4	20%
Broker-3	AB	+3	15%
Broker-2	ABC	+2	10%
Broker-1	ABCD	+1	  5%

	Goods are delivered to the ship in 4 days. Accelerated delivery, add 10% per
day.

(From T4) Trader (Business)-Int or Soc This skill is useful in identifying
the best cargos to carry from one world to another. It gives a character an
advantage in commercial trading, as it improves one's ability to estimate the
resale value of items in the trade and commerce rules. (See Chapter 10 for
details.)         The Trader skill normally references the Intelligence
attribute, due to the cleverness necessary for recognizing highly-marketable
cargos. A reasonably high Social Level can be of help as well, enabling the
character to make useful connections with buyers and sellers.
	Broker is one of two members of the Business skill cluster (the other is
Trader).

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1718
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, August 20 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1719



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

History skill (was T41 Skills Draft C Chemistry)
Re: Flawed accumulator energy densities
Troupe style (was: Re: Question for Marc)
Re: Skills and Tech Levels
Re: alternate tech discussion
Humans and Zero-G (was: Sex in zero-G)
Re: Event Horizon
Re: Trader skill vs Broker skill
re:Deep system probes disappeared
Re: Gearhead Challenge: More on M-Drives!
Re: Brawling vs Martial Arts skill
Terra TL
Auction Update #19: RPG Items (AD&D, Traveller, Space 1889)

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 10:18:52 +0100
From: "Nick Munn" <N.S.Munn@sheffield.ac.uk>
Subject: History skill (was T41 Skills Draft C Chemistry)

John_Wood@cbtsys.com writes:

[Me:]

> History deals with the actions of whole societies, in much the same
> way as Psychology deals with individual motivations.  While the study
> of history is focussed on past events, the skills of a historian can
> be applied to interpret or even predict events in the present day.
> 
> History skill reflects the ability of a character to find and
> understand the social and economic factors behind a situation, past
> or present, as well as a broad overview of history as a whole and
> detailed knowledge of one period or culture.

[rest deleted]

> As a history graduate I'd like to propose some amendments to the history
> skill proffered by Nick, principally I'd warn against combining history and
> psychohistory skills in such a matter of fact way. The psychological
> comparison of societies and individuals is a useful analogy that falls over
> quite quickly when applied too earnestly.  I imagine that psychohistory (in
> the sci fi/dune sense) requires knowledge much more in the domain of the
> mass media specialist. The psychohistorical 'skills' available to the
> ordinary history graduate or postgraduate relate to the psychological
> analysis of the motives of historical individuals, not to the manipulation
> of countless billions of contemporaries. So I'd remove that 'manipulate
> government' section.

I'd certainly agree this in real life.  However, in Traveller I'd be 
slightly more inclined to give characters a chance to manipulate 
whole societies, in the pattern of Poul Anderson's Trader Team et al.
or Jerry Pournelle's Falkenberg novels.  (I didn't say it would be 
easy!)  Not that one roll on History skill would enable you to start 
a revolution, but it might tell you *how* to start one.

> I'd define history as:
> 
> A body of knowledge concerned with the recording, study, and critical
> analysis of past events through contemporaneous recorded testimony in
> written, oral, and other forms. Characters may have specific knowledge of a
> particular period, race, or society or they may have studied history
> thematically, for instance concentrating on economics, politics, social
> history, the history of science and technology etc.

This is a wonderful description of the study of history (or more 
loosely the humanities).  What I was trying to define was the 
"functional" aspect of History skill to PCs.  Traveller skills are 
generally rather practical in scope, which is perhaps one reason why 
CT didn't have science skills (too abstract), and I was attempting to 
frame History in a similar way.  Thus also the blurring between 
history, geography, sociology and economics -- Traveller deals in 
"catch-all" skills for the most part.

Nick
Dr. Nick Munn, Dept. of Information Studies, University of Sheffield
Tel. (0)114 222 2673, email n.s.munn@sheffield.ac.uk

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 11:50:19 +0100
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: Re: Flawed accumulator energy densities

>For useful power units, you want this sort of capacitor, but with 100
>or 1000 volt capability. Just pray that a bullet doesn't hit one of
>them, as the energy release will be moderately explosive. :-)
>
>--
>Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)

The same could be said about any energy accumulator.


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

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 03:59:32 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Troupe style (was: Re: Question for Marc)

At 09:39 PM 8/19/97 -0800, Richard wrote:

>* Use troupe-style roleplaying, where each player gets to run several
>characters (including GM characters). I am trying this in my campaign, and
>it makes a huge improvement. Not only does everyone get a chance to play a
>superstar (and a shmuck), but it gives me and the players a lot more
>freedom. Players can choose what character they will bring into each
>encounter and don't get as upset when their character dies. I can run
>adventures where different things are happening at the same time and don't
>have to rationalize why everything always happens to the same 4 guys. After
>trying this I wouldn't go back to one character per player.

Here, here!  I've been experimenting with troupe style for the campaign I'm
writing, and it works well in Traveller.   The players' main PCs are the
command staff of the Ramble-On Rose, but they also have characters who are
crewmwn, scientists, and ship's troops.  This makes each adventure
different, and allows the players to experiment with different
personalities in the same game structure.

One warning, this should only be used if your players are fairly
experienced.  The stress of monitoring 3 or 4 characters can result in the
"Fighter #23" syndrome quickly.

- --
+------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry         dberry@hooked.net   |
| Gearhead & Planetologist, Traveller since 1977 |
|     Inquistor Magnus, Royal Commission for     |
|               Canon Correctness                |
|         http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|************************************************|
|  "To live effectively is to live with adequate |
|   information."           -Norbert Wiener      |
+------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 04:07:56 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Skills and Tech Levels

At 08:05 PM 8/19/97 -0400, Frnaklin wrote:
>I have a suggestion regarding the idea of labeling Skills with their
>associated Tech Level.  
>
>Instead of using the exact Tech *Level*, consider using the Tech Level
>*Range*; i.e., "Mechanic/Ind", "Electronics/PreStel", "Computer/HiStel",
>etc.  Since the Tech Level Chart lists "bands" or "ranges" for the Tech
>Levels *already*, this would sufficiently restrict skills to a TL-range
>while still allowing some versatility.  
>
>(BTW, the above example skills were Mechanic for "Industrial" TLs,
>Electronics for "Pre-Stellar" TLs, and Computer for "High Stellar" TLs.)  
>
>Comments, anyone? 

I like this, it adds a great deal of flavor to the skills.

One thing that struck me as I've been reading this discussion of skills and
TL is the scene in Turtledove's "Worldwar" series where the British have
finally gotten their hands on a Lizard fighter, and the best radar techs on
the island are just cracking the nose to take a look.

Drooling with anticipation over the expected sudden improvement to their
own radar sets, they open the fighter's nose and find...  purple boards
covered with odd gold tracings.  Not a tube in sight.

This is why we need to set skills off by tech level. 

- --
+------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry         dberry@hooked.net   |
| Gearhead & Planetologist, Traveller since 1977 |
|     Inquistor Magnus, Royal Commission for     |
|               Canon Correctness                |
|         http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|************************************************|
|  "To live effectively is to live with adequate |
|   information."           -Norbert Wiener      |
+------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 12:18:54 +0100
From: Bruce E J Lewis <bruce@legend.ftech.co.uk>
Subject: Re: alternate tech discussion

At 16:48 19/08/97 -0700, Bruce Johnson wrote:
>No one is saying the things last a 100 years, but contol systems built
>using time proven designs will be CHEAP, that's REAL CHEAP, folks, to
>implement. No one designs a thermostat with a cutting edge RISC chip, just
>'cause 6800 chips are obsolete as personal computer CPU (no I didnt
>leave off the last 0, I think Moto still makes 'em)

	No, but what we now know as 6800's were cutting edge at one time. So in a
hundred years control systems will have something we don't yet know about
but may be a few years old to no longer be cutting edge then.
>
>If anything, the fact that stuff doesn't last very long tends to make the
>subsystems cheap and similar in construction, since they're designed to be
>replaced.

	Yes, I accept that. All depends though if a certain manufacturer wishes to
do that. Candle versus light bulb scenario.
> 
>GaAs chips are used now, for a number of high frequency applications, but
>they're more expensive to make, and why do it, just because you can?

	I didn't know that.

>Silicon IC's are sheap, well known in their behavior, and for most
>applications, plenty fast enough for what they do. Again, you don't need a
>GaAs superfast RISC chip to run a thermostat.
>
	But again, early thermostats never had any processors in them at all.
Going from nothing to 6800 could be a similar leap as going from 80486 to
who knows what in a 100 years time.

>Absolutely, this is why _computers_ in Traveller are much more powerful
>than they are today. But, to belabor a point, that has nothing to do with
>embedded controllers...

	It may do. No one can predict what will happen.
>
>Why? Silicon replaced vaccuum tubes for some very important reasons: they
>run on much lower power, they are much more rugged, they are enormously
>smaller, and they're really cheap to make. New circuit paradigms, such as
>optical circuits, will make the processors faster, but not much smaller
>(we're already running into quantum tunneling effects in some chip
>designs), not much lower power (unless they find a better way to make
>led's) and not much more rugged than silicon. So I don't think silicon's
>going to go away, unless there are really, really unexpected ways to
>fabricate and use these new circuits.

	But that's my point entirely! Something may come along in a 100 years time
that we don't know about, so to say what will be isn't necessarily going to
be correct.

	See ya...


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

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 23:59:50 +1200
From: Andrew Moffatt-Vallance <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Humans and Zero-G (was: Sex in zero-G)

>Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 10:16:44 +2
>From: "RFXn" <mlaakso@utu.fi>
>Subject: Sex in zero-G (was: Re: Zero-G beds)

>	Somehow, I knew it'd come to this. For some reason, (almost) 
>all players start asking about zero-G sex at some point. Here's what 
>I know of the subject.

The curiosity about zero-g sex is truely one of the few universal constants
amongst Traveller players :*). In my games I take a conservative approach
(couple embrace, camera pans upward, scene fades out in soft focus; cut to
breakfast on the terrace the next morning).

>	Actually, I've read some hard info on this from some aviation
>magazine years back. It would appear the Russians tried this in the
>mid-80s, and turned out to be a disaster. The body movements put the
>participants in a spinning motion; I understand the joyful moment
>was interrupted by breaking a wrist in addition to bruises and other
>painful things. :)

>	The Russians then designed a cradle with handholds and straps so 
>that two people could have sex in space. Not out of friendlines to 
>the lonely cosmonauts, but because the Russian space administration 
>had been told to experiment on zero-G breeding and childbirth. I 
>assume the experiment failed.

It's one of the very real concerns with long duration spaceflights (such as
to Mars). Assuming a mixed gender crew (almost a certainty now), the
possibility of a pregancy becomes quite real and half way between Earth and
Mars there ain't a lot of options. We know that a number of human biological
systems such as immunological responses and cellular reproduction are very
badly effected by zero-g; and there's some very good reasons to suspect that
foetal development would also be adversely effected. Then one moves on to the
nightmare of childbirth in zero-g, like what role does gravity play in the
physical changes that women undergo in later pregnancy? how does zero-g
effect labour? just how the heck does one cope with the copious release of
body fluids involoved in childbirth without gravity to collect them for you?
Compaired with this the actual mechanics of zero-g sex are simple.

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

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

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 03:12:39 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Event Horizon

In mail, bmac@astro.ucla.edu writes:

>
> Are you sure you aren't dropping a meter-to-km factor?
>
>>If we assume that it is an 8 hour
>>trip to Jupiter (about 5 AU) then at constant acceleration, it's about
>>.36 g. Low, but not *that* low. 
>
> This seems low; 8 hours at 0.36 G (one-way, not turn-around) is 
> (0.5 * 0.36 * 10 * (8*3600)^2 = 1.5x10^10m = about a tenth of an AU.

Lets see...

distance to turnover = 2.5 AU = 3.75e8 km = 3.75e11 m
time to turnover = 4 hours = 1.44e4 sec

3.75e11 = .5*A*(1.44e4)^2
3.75e11 = .5*A*2.0736e8
7.5e11 = A*2.0736e8
A = 3.61689148e3 m/sec^2
A = 369 g
V at turnover = .17 c!!!

Gee, I think we just found a different problem for our intrepid
flyboys. Since they have to fight g-forces when they manuever (shown
all the time), they don't have inertial damping. So they are a thin
layer of goo inside the fighters. :-)

BTW, at one gee it takes them 6.4 *days* to make the trip. I don't
think anybody can spend a week in a fighter cockpit!

>>Well, energy wise, a zero-g bed is *expensive*. It's equivalent to
>>hauling a person 1000 miles straight up against a 1 g field (or
>>boosting them to escape velocity). It also gets nasty if the person
>>slips out of the bed's "field", as they'll *regain* all that energy as
>>kinetic energy. Which results in an interesting display as they turn
>>into a meteor inside the confines of their bedroom.
>
> There's no particular evidence that Traveller grav technology works this
> way (or that any grav tech would have to.) There's lots of ways to get
> into "zero-G" without getting to escape velocity. For example, step out a
> second-story window and you're in free fall, albeit briefly, without much
> energy cost. A zero-G bed just has to be a region of locally flat spacetime
> which (while currently impossible) shouldn't particularly require any extra
> energy. (Moving an object within the field shoudl require energy due to 
> conservation of energy - the field has to provide the energy the object will
> regain when it exits the field - but those are small numbers.) 

Well, I don't like the "step in the side of the gravity well" solution.
It creates some nasty field gradients above and below the bed. You get
a zero g area, but the top and bottom of the volume are very steep
gravity gradients to make up for it. So an object falling into the
field from above will get an extra boost. and likewise, one that slips
out the bottom of the null g area will also be boosted.

        /                          /
      /                           /
    /                         ____
  /                         /
/                          /
normal slope of field      field with step in it

Since the "overall" cuvature has to remain constant, the local
curvature has to get exaggerated on both "sides" of the flat area.
Since field strength is proportional to slope, you see the problem.
(the worst case would be having a "vertical" slope at the high or low
end. That'd *really* ruin your day.

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 97 07:04:56 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: Trader skill vs Broker skill

On 08/19/97 at 09:01 PM,  Erwin Fritz <efritz@glja.com> said:

>Eris Reddoch wrote:
>> 
>> Broker is the skill of getting the best price when buying or selling a
>> cargo, ie. "bargaining", "neogotiating", cutting a deal. Trader is the
>> skill of picking the best cargo to buy and determining the best place to
>> take it for sale.
>> 

>If so, the two skills should have associated tasks. Now, Broker skill is
>already covered in the rules regarding Trade and Commerce.

Yeah, but improvements are possible. ;->

>Trader skill, OTOH, by this definition needs a task along the lines of:

>	To find cargo to buy speculatively:
>	Routine, Trader, Admin or Strtwse, 14 hrs (safe, unskilled OK).

Quite right! The difficulty depends on the planet (for me that's GM fiat at
the moment), and the time is more like 3 days.

>Now, what happens when this task fails? The person doesn't find  cargo?

Any of several things:

1. no suitable cargo is found.
2. smaller selection of cargo found.
3. cargo found, but the Trader is *wrong* about it's value.
4. cargo found, but the Trader is *wrong* about how valuable it will be on
planet X.

That sort of thing.

>Introducing this task sure means there will be less cargo to be had!

Maybe, maybe not.  Rob Prior has a good system on his website for
developing Trade Tables that you might want to look at, it includes tasks. 

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

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

Date: 20 Aug 1997 08:59 EDT
From: "Robert Eaglestone" <eaglesto@nortel.ca>
Subject: re:Deep system probes disappeared

Now *that* is a great setting for Milieu E21!  What characters
wouldn't be worried about investigating an unknown anomaly
that regularly swatted probes?


>>Whoah ! What deep system probes have disappeared ?

>Mars Observer for one.  A couple of Russian probes, including a craft that
>was making a close approach to Phobos when it went off-line.. the Soviets
>refused to release the last image sent by the probe.  

>So many probes have died between Earth and Mars that NASA jokes about the
>"Great Galactic Ghoul" or "Big Man's Flyswatter."

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 06:29:48 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Gearhead Challenge: More on M-Drives!

At 10:19 PM 8/19/97 +0100, you wrote:
>Following my queries yesterday as to what can a QSDS ship use as an MDrive
>at TL9, I've got another one.
>
>Can a T4 thruster plate ship travel between an outer gas giant and an inner
>planet with the fall of in drive efficiency?  Are the calculations in the
>T4 rules wrong, as they assume constant acceleration to mid-point, and then
>constant deceleration to 'rest' at target world. If the T-plates fall off
>mid-way this will effect travel times detrimentally...

According to FFS2, the curoff point for thrusters is about 2000AU for a Sol
like star.  This makes thrusters very usable within almost any solar system.

Travel times would still make micro-jumps preferable in many cases (Ie,
Earth to Pluto.)
- --
+------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry         dberry@hooked.net   |
| Gearhead & Planetologist, Traveller since 1977 |
|     Inquistor Magnus, Royal Commission for     |
|               Canon Correctness                |
|         http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|************************************************|
|  "To live effectively is to live with adequate |
|   information."           -Norbert Wiener      |
+------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 06:42:07 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Brawling vs Martial Arts skill

At 05:17 AM 8/20/97 -0400, Marc wrote:

>That, of course, is the challenge... as I approach the combat rules. My
>intention (not having yet reviewed the combat rules in depth as yet) is to
>rewrite combat as a task based activity which differentiates between the
>various skills.

If I may jump the gun a bit here, I'd like to see the revised combat system
go back to an "action point" style of system.  I've been fooling around
with a varient personal combat system since T4 came out, and have had great
results with mechanics based on Snapshot/AHL.

In my system APs are based on Dex+Int+Tactics.  This pool is used to move,
shoot, and perform tasks inside each six-second combat turn.  Moving
cautiously down a corridor, covering doorways costs 5AP per 1.5m square.
Players plot out their moves, and announce them simultaniously.  If you run
into a situation that voids what you were going to do, you lose all APs
that you committed but haven't spent.  This keeps players from declaring
"I'll run down the corridor, open the airlock, and throw the grenade
through."  They are much mor e likely to keep a reserve of APs just in case.

This system is based on my training and experiences as an infantryman along
with research into the nature of combat.  In dangerous situations, people
tend to get very cautious about movement and exposing themselves, and I've
seen troops moving "on edge" to keep ready for the next surprise.

If anyone is interested, I can clean it up a bit and post it to the list.
- --
+------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry         dberry@hooked.net   |
| Gearhead & Planetologist, Traveller since 1977 |
|     Inquistor Magnus, Royal Commission for     |
|               Canon Correctness                |
|         http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|************************************************|
|  "To live effectively is to live with adequate |
|   information."           -Norbert Wiener      |
+------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 22:40:43 +0800
From: Michael Bailey <mickb@opera.iinet.net.au>
Subject: Terra TL

Both sides have made good arguments here...thought I'd throw in my A$.02,
which happens to straddle the difference in opinion quite nicely *g*

At 1002, the Imperium was moving into TL 15...most TL 15 constructs were
prototypes, technology demonstrators and pre-production models, with a few
items in full production.. Although the Imperium certainly used TL 15
equipment during the Rim War (what better place to try it out?), there
wasn't enough to substantially alter the TL of it's forces, which were
still largely TL 14 (late TL 14).

The Solomani Confederation was solid TL 14 in most areas at the end of the
Rim War.  Subsequent research and espionage pushed it into the TL14/15
border by 1110... the Confederation in the CT ear (c. 1107) was late TL 14
overall, pushing into TL 15.  Between 1107 and 1117, some invisible 'line'
was crossed in the Vilani dominated Bureau for Technological Assessment
*g*, and the Confederation moved into early TL 15.  At the same time, parts
of the Imperium were pushing into TL 16 (e.g. Vincennes, Dlan).

Could make for some good adventures...Solomani agents crossing the border
to steal Imperial technology, or Imperial interests trying to stop them.

Opinion only, remember...


Later


Michael T. Bailey (mickb@opera.iinet.net.au)

"You drive", he said, "I think there's something wrong with me"
			Hunter S. Thompson - 'Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas'

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 10:53:26 -0400
From: Kevin Combs <KCOMBS@mdems.ab.umd.edu>
Subject: Auction Update #19: RPG Items (AD&D, Traveller, Space 1889)

Rules:   Update 8/20/97  -  07:00 EDT         

Please check to see if you have won any items in this auction.

If so and you are not bidding on anything else, please
email me your smail address along with a list of the items
won and I can get a postage amount.

If so and you are still bidding on other items, please
continue and email the above info when the bidding stops.

1. Bids in US dollars. Minimum bid is listed. Bid in $.50 
increments for items under $10. $1.00 increments over $10.

2. Buyout offers will be considered.

3. Buyer pays shipping.

4. I prefer money orders, but I will take checks. I will 
hold items for one week so checks can clear my bank.  All 
checks must be drawn on a U.S. bank and in U.S. currency.

5. I reserve the right to pull any item for any reason. 

6. This auction will be updated every day.

7. The going x1, going x2, gone process will be used after
the first 10 days of the auction. Items will upgraded to 
the next level every two days when no bids are recieved.

8. Send all bids to kevin013@earthlink.net.

9. The following conditions will be used:   
    (MN) Item is perfect.
    (UP) Complete with the counters unpunched.
    (Ex) This item has been used/read, with minor marks.
    (PU) Complete with counters punched.  I do not know if 
         all counters are present.
    Some other comments regarding condition are noted as needed.  

Traveller Related Items
GDW     Fifth Frontier War (Box has some scuff    
        marks and is slightly pushed in)
        $55.00 rbeck@iquest.net (8/18) going x2
        $50.00 pnewman@alaska.net 
        $45.00 DMoody@bridge.com 

DGP     101 Vehicles                              
        $ 9.00 mark.samuels@questintl.com  gone

DGP     Referee's Gaming Kit                      
        Buyout - $12.00 - gone

DGP     Starship Operator's Manual                
        $16.00 gmgoffin@pacbell.net gone
        
GDW     Azhanti High Lightning (50% unpunched     
        does not have the tech manual or combat
        chart)
        Buyout - $40.00 - gone
        
Judge's 
Guild   Doom of the Singing Star                  MN  
        $ 6.50 efh@student.umass.edu - gone
                
Judge's 
Guild   Starships & Spacecraft                    MN  
        $ 5.50 efh@student.umass.edu gone

Martian 
Metals  15mm Traveller Figures (217 painted &     
        mounted 15mm Traveller figures.  Figure
        types includes Kree, Humanoid, Vargr, 
        Zhodani, Droyne, Robots and others.  Large  
        variety of posses, weapons, and clothing.  
        Also included is a 15mm 2-seat hovercraft 
        and 10 15mm Star Wars painted figures.  A
        total of 228 painted figures.)
        Buyout - $150.00 - gone!
        

AD&D Related Items                                Co     

TSR     Keep on the Borderlands                   Ex  
        $ 5.00 JaseHawkw@worldnet.att.net gone

TSR     Dragonlance Saga Book One                 Ex 
        $ 4.00 saveall@together.net (8/15) gone

TSR     Art of the Dragonlance Saga               Ex  
        $11.00 stephan.Lange@iwf-mt.tu-berlin.de gone
        $10.00 BFireforge@aol.com

TSR     World of Krynn Trail Map                  
        $16.00 stephan.Lange@iwf-mt.tu-berlin.de gone
        $15.00 BFireforge@aol.com 

TSR     Al-Qadim Rulebook (slight cover tear)     Ex  
        $ 3.00 pblood@transbay.net gone
           
TSR     Atlas of the Dragonlance World            Ex
        $12.00 jhascher@gte.net gone
        
TSR     Castle Greyhawk                           
        $17.00 EugHarvey@aol.com gone
        $16.00 tarquin@ro.com 
        
TSR     DL 1 - Dragons of Despair                 Ex  $ 3.00
TSR     DL 2 - Dragons of Flame                   Ex  $ 3.00
TSR     DL 5 - Dragons of Mystery                 Ex  $ 3.00
TSR     DL 6 - Dragons of Ice                     Ex  $ 3.00
TSR     DL 7 - Dragons of Light                   Ex  $ 3.00
TSR     DL 8 - Dragons of War                     Ex  $ 3.00
TSR     DL 9 - Dragons of Deceit                  Ex  $ 3.00
TSR     DL10 - Dragons of Dreams                  Ex  $ 3.00

TSR     Dragonlance Classics Vol I                Ex  
        $ 8.00 lazascan@aol.com gone

TSR     Gnomes - 100, Dragons - 0                 Ex  $ 3.00
        $ 5.00 jhascher@gte.net gone
        $ 4.00 lazascan@aol.com 

TSR     Leaves from the Inn of the Last Home      Ex  $ 3.00


Space 1889 Related Items
GDW     Cloudships and Gunboats                   
        $ 4.50 pnewman@alaska.net  gone
        $ 4.00 Thorinn3@aol.com 
        $ 3.00 jlong@wilmington.net 

GDW     Legions of Mars (21 - 25mm unpainted      
        figures)
        $17.00 rfields@actrix.gen.nz gone
        $15.00 DMoody@bridge.com 
        $12.00 rfields@actrix.gen.nz
        
GDW     Soldier's Companion                                  Ex
        $17.00 rbeck@iquest.net   gone
        $15.00 DMoody@bridge.com 
        $11.00 Thorinn3@aol.com
        $10.00 egc@northnet.org 

GDW     Victorian Adventurers (10 - 25mm          
        unpainted figures)
        $20.00 ggm1201@dmacc.cc.ia.us gone
        $16.00 cgriffen@cisco.com 
        $16.00 rfields@actrix.gen.nz
                        
GDW     Sky Galleons of Mars (also includes a     
        copy of Cloudships & Gunboats)
        $20.00 DMoody@bridge.com    gone
        $17.00 pnewman@alaska.net
        $16.00 Thorinn3@aol.com 
        $15.00 terrell_scoggins@bigfoot.com 

GDW     Canal Priests of Mars                     
        $ 6.00 Thorinn3@aol.com gone
                
GDW     Caravans of Mars                          
        $ 5.50 gmgoffin@pacbell.net gone
                
GDW     Cloud Captains of Mars                    
        $ 7.00 terrell_scoggins@bigfoot.com gone
        $ 6.00 pnewman@alaska.net 
        
GDW     Conklin's Atlas of the World              
        $ 6.00 terrell_scoggins@bigfoot.com gone
                
GDW     Ironclads & Ether Flyers                  
        $ 8.00 terrell_scoggins@bigfoot.com gone
                
GDW     More Tales from the Ether                 
        $ 7.00 terrell_scoggins@bigfoot.com gone
        
GDW     Referee's Screen                          
        $ 4.00 pnewman@alaska.net gone
        $ 3.00 jlong@wilmington.net
        $ 3.00 pnewman@alaska.net

GDW     Space 1889 Rule Book (Hardback)           
        $ 8.00 terrell_scoggins@bigfoot.com gone
        $ 5.00 jlong@wilmington.net

GDW     Steppelords of Mars                       
        $ 4.00 pnewman@alaska.net gone
        $ 3.00 jlong@wilmington.net

GDW     Tales from the Ether (some cover marks)   
        $ 3.00 jlong@wilmington.net gone

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1719
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, August 20 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1720



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Task Resolution
Re: Gearhead Challenge: More on M-Drives!
T41 Skills Draft F First Aid (out of sequence due to request)
T41 Skills Draft M Medical (out of sequence due to request)
Re: Fighters, fatigue, bathrooms, and zero-G beds
2047; 1.0 part 1 (was: 21st Century Terra, et al.)
Re: LaGrange Points
Re: zero-G beds (my vote:no)
Re: Zero-G Nappy Time (longish)
THUDDD update
Re: Brawling vs Martial Arts skill
Re: T4+
T41 Skills Draft F Fencing
Re: Brawling vs Martial Arts skill

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 11:04:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Task Resolution

So here are the objections to the T4 / T41 Task system

1. It uses the half die.

2. Tasks are too easy.

3. Tasks use full strength Char and Full Strength Skill in the task statement
(corollary: skills are unqually represented compared to characteristics).

Without discussion or elaboration of these points, I invite simple 1-sentence
additions to this list so it can continue to be discussed.

Marc

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 08:13:22 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: Re: Gearhead Challenge: More on M-Drives!

I think you're mistaking T-plates with Contragrav. As written, T-Plates
don't fall off until far out in the outer reaches of a system, like out in
the Oort Cloud, so travel between planets in the system is fine.
Contragrav falls off dramatically at orbital distances.

Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs


On Tue, 19 Aug 1997, SD Mooney wrote:

> Following my queries yesterday as to what can a QSDS ship use as an MDrive
> at TL9, I've got another one.
> 
> Can a T4 thruster plate ship travel between an outer gas giant and an inner
> planet with the fall of in drive efficiency?  Are the calculations in the
> T4 rules wrong, as they assume constant acceleration to mid-point, and then
> constant deceleration to 'rest' at target world. If the T-plates fall off
> mid-way this will effect travel times detrimentally...
> 
> TIA
> 
> Dom
> 
> PS thanks for the answers on the Bloodwell and Regina Down.
> 
> 
> 
> ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
> "Omnia Mutantur Nihil Interit"  -  Sandman 'The Wake'
> "Everything Changes, but nothing is truly lost" 
> 
> 
> 

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 11:05:37 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: T41 Skills Draft F First Aid (out of sequence due to request)

x	First Aid	Int, Edu
	The character has expertise in stabilizing injured persons during an
emergency, including treatment of cuts, wounds, and bleeding, administration
of emergency procedures (artificial resuscitation, CPR, the Heimlich
maneuver), administer artificial resuscitation, and operation of emergency
medical equipment. The individual is trained in patching up non-lethal
injuries and keeping the mortally- wounded alive until they can receive more
appropriate medical aid. 
	Immediate Action. The individual knows the steps to be taken immediately
upon discovering an injured or ill subject, including stabilizing the
condition, preventing further harm under the circumstances, and generally
treating major immediate symptoms.

	To apply first aid (basic situation).
	(Edu + First Aid) < Average (2D)
	Medical may be substituted for First Aid.

	To apply first aid (difficult situation).
	(Edu + First Aid) < Difficult (2.5D)
	Allows possibility of Spectacular Success / Failure.
	Medical may be substituted for First Aid.

	Rescue Operations. The individual is trained to work alone and with others
to extricate victims from dangerous situations.

	To rescue a trapped victim.
	(Edu + First Aid) < Difficult (2.5D)
	Co-operative (3 Str)

	Paramedics. An individual with Edu + First Aid equal to 10+ is classified as
a Paramedic. 

	Medical and First Aid are related skills. Medical covers trained doctors
(and nurses) with expertise in the diagnosis and treatment of illness and
injury. First Aid covers emergency treatment and immediate action by
laypersons and paramedics.
	Any level of Medical is the equivalent of First Aid-1.
	First Aid is a default skill.

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 11:04:02 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: T41 Skills Draft M Medical (out of sequence due to request)

	Medical (Physical Sciences)	Edu, Dex
	The character is trained in the treatment of injuries and illnesses.=20

	Immediate Action. The individual knows the steps to be taken immediately
upon discovering an injured or ill subject, including stabilizing the
condition, preventing further harm under the circumstances, and generally
treating major immediate symptoms.

	To apply first aid (basic situation).
	(Edu + First Aid) < Average (2D)
	Medical may be substituted for First Aid.

	To apply first aid (difficult situation).
	(Edu + First Aid) < Difficult (2.5D)
	Allows possibility of Spectacular Success / Failure.
	Medical may be substituted for First Aid.

	Diagnosis. The individual has been trained in, and has experience in,
diagnosis based on apparent or reported symptoms, and on the results of
laboratory and other tests.

	To gather appropriate information about illness/injury.
	(Edu + Medical) < Difficult (2.5D)
	Uncertain (1D)

	Treatment. The individual has been trained in, and has experience in,
treatment of illness or injury based on a specific diagnosis.

	To prescribe appropriate treatment for illness
	(Edu + Medical) < Difficult (2.5D)
	Uncertain (1D)

	To prescribe appropriate treatment for injury
	(Edu + Medical) < Average (2D)

	Default Species Specialties. By default, a character=92s medical ability=
 lies
in the diagnosis and treatment of his own race (thus humans best treat
humans; vargr best treat vargr, etc). Medical skill can be used at half l=
evel
when treating a patient outside of his species specialty. Veterinarian
treatment (of animals) by an individual with Medical skill is also perfor=
med
at half level.

	Medical is one of five members of the Physical Sciences skill cluster (t=
he
others are Biology, Chemistry, Geology, and Physics).
	Medical and First Aid are related skills. Medical covers trained doctors
(and nurses) with expertise in the diagnosis and treatment of illness and
injury. First Aid covers emergency treatment and immediate action by
laypersons and paramedics.
	Medical and Psychology are related skills. Medical covers physical ailme=
nts
(some diseases or malfunctions of the brain are physical ailments with me=
ntal
manifestations and are treated by Medical); Psychology covers mental
ailments.
	Any level of Medical is the equivalent of First Aid-1.

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 08:22:34 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: Re: Fighters, fatigue, bathrooms, and zero-G beds

On Wed, 20 Aug 1997, Michael Koehne wrote:

> Moin Paul D. Owensby,
> 
> > This is a reason the staterooms on my ship plans tend to be smaller than the
> > usual design, I don't include beds in my deckplans. I can't imagine any 
> > culture that has gravitic control as an everyday fact of life not having 
> > zero g beds as the norm while planet side.
> 
> 	human bodys are not build for zero G, you'll either have the
> 	musle problems because you have variating gravitiy, or even
> 	more problem if you have low g for most time, when you are
> 	back in normal g.

Humans have some problems in _continuous_ zero-G, and the long term
effects aren't known. We're talking _intermittent_ zero-G here, folks, so
the effects we're talking about wouldn't be manifesting themselves. In
fact, I'd suspect that people would spend less time sleeping, since once
you got used to sleeping at zero gee, your body would be able to relax
more, and rest more efficiently, and so could get by with 4-6 hours where
the average is 7-9 hours now.

Acclimitization is the key. We won't know the effects of intermittent zero
gee until we can study it.

Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs

> 
> 
> -- 
> 	kraehe@bakunin.north.de		human.is-bremen.de/~kraehe/traveller
> 		  " ceterum censeo MSDOS esse delendam "
> 

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 10:54:46 -0600 (MDT)
From: Marcus Teter <marcus@geminga.physics.montana.edu>
Subject: 2047; 1.0 part 1 (was: 21st Century Terra, et al.)

Here is my first attempt at establishing the global situation in 2047.  I
am assuming that both small scale self-determination and formation of
large aliances continue.  I am splitting it up into Regions to prevent
myself from falling into the "Us vs. Them" mentality.  Notice that I have
no intentions of showing when or why a particular Aliance or Nation came
to power.  I am assuming that given the right set of circumstances, 50
years is plenty of time to bring about many changes to the world.

- ---------------------
2047
Part 1, North America:

	Nations: 19
	Major Power: United States (54 States; 2 states split, 2 others
		join.) Power lies with individual State governments, but
		trend is reversing.
	Other Powers: Canada, Mexico, Cuba.
	Military Strength (relative): USA, Mexico, Canada, Cuba.
	Economic Strength (relative): USA, Canada, Mexico, Panama.
	Major Space Powers: USA
	Minor Space Powers: Canada, Mexico, Panama.
	Potential Space Powers: Cuba, Trinadad/Tobago.
	Economic Alliances: NAFTA(USA, Canada, Mexico, Panama, Costa Rica)
		CC {Caribian Coalitian}(Cuba, Haiti, Dominican Rep,
		Jamaca, Trinadad/Tobago)
	Military Alliances: Kiska Accord (USA, Canada, Russia, Japan):
		Countering China/N. Korea Threat.  CC: Asserting Influence
		in Caribian. CAA {Central American Alliance}(USA, Mexico,
		Panama, Costa Rica, Columbia): Countermeasure for CC.
	Space Cooperation Efforts: NAFTA, USA/Russia partnership.
	Major Regional Multinational Corporate States: GM, GDW, AeroCorp,
		L&M/Rockwell.
	Corporate States involved in Space ventures: GDW, L&M/Rockwell.

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

Corrections? Additions? Coments?

Marcus A. Teter

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 12:04:03 -0400 (EDT)
From: XatoKuom@aol.com
Subject: Re: LaGrange Points

I believe the LaGrange points are located at the points in space where the
gravitational forces are next to zero.  That is the point between the Earth
and the Moon when the gravitational attraction is equal from both sources.

Scott Quigg(XatoKuom@aol.com)

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 09:51:23 -0600
From: Glenn Hoppe <starcity@sk.sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: zero-G beds (my vote:no)

Peter Newman wrote:

> > > How about simply using gravity control to move the bed into the ceiling
> > > when it is not in use and letting it descend when needed.
> >
> > Why bother?
> >
> > I think that gravitic control would be something that would be kept
> > under central control of the captain and crew. It seems to me that it
> > would be a breach of security to allow passengers access to gravity
> > controls, even at a localized level.
> >
> > Why waste power on manipulating bed gravity when space could be
> > conserved by simply having beds that fold down from the walls or recess
> > into the floor?
> 
> Because modern scientific evidence has shown that zero gravity for 24
> hours a day is unhealthy.  I think that it is quite possible that zero
> gravity for 8 hours a day is also unhealthy.  In the abscence of real
> world data indicating otherwise I do not see any reason to assume that
> zero gravity beds will catch on as I think it is likely they will be
> unhealthy.

I quite agree. The original poster advocated beds that reduced gravity
in the sleeping area to zero-G, even when planet-bound, so passengers
could sleep standing up and thus save space. I pointed out the danger of
having a local area of gravity control, and that the same space could be
saved by high-tech materials and folding beds.

> > I'm sure advances in materials and ergonomic design will allow future
> > travellers to sleep in comfort on a few centimeters of SleepWell(tm)
> > Narcoplast pressure responsive sleep surface that folds down from the
> > wall.
> >
> > ADVERTISING BLURB:
> >
> > Discriminating captains know that passengers accept nothing less than
> > SleepWell(tm) Narcoplast sleeping surfaces!
> 
> On the other hand this is a great advertising blurb and it is almost
> worth assuming zero gravity beds to have this set up.  I am not
> technologically conservative in general, I think that in the future
> people will do some everyday things vastly differently than we do today.
> 
> However - I do not think that being in zero gravity unnecessarily is
> medically prudent.  Having the beds pop into the ceiling saves space
> (usefull) but does not require zero gravity sleeping (unhealthy till
> proven otherwise).

I agree completely. My SleepWell(tm) Narcoplast sleeping surface is
designed to work under the 1G standard gravity of the starship. It folds
down from the wall, like beds in those small cheezy apartments in the
movies, sans noisy box-spring.

Another point against zero-G beds: Wouldn't the daily switch from 1G to
0G be unhealthy, uncomfortable and disconcerting? Waking up in the
morning would be a whole new negative experience if one had to drag
oneself off cloud nine and onto the floor, the oppressive effects of
gravity making it even more difficult to get on with the day...

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 12:01:43 -0400
From: "Paul D. Owensby" <pauld@athens.net>
Subject: Re: Zero-G Nappy Time (longish)

I apologize for this being rather longish, it's just that it seems to have
provoked such comment, I think it would be a savings of bandwidth
to combine all the posts and answer them at once. Thanks for all the
input, guys!

>> How about simply using gravity control to move the bed into the ceiling
>> when it is not in use and letting it descend when needed.
>
>Why bother?
>
>I think that gravitic control would be something that would be kept
>under central control of the captain and crew. It seems to me that it
>would be a breach of security to allow passengers access to gravity
>controls, even at a localized level.

Different strokes. The crew of the ships as I see them would have override
control over anyplace on the ship, of course, but would allow a good deal
of leeway to what folks do in their cabins. (The more I think about the 
possibilities of NarcoPlast, the more I like including it in the cabins as 
well as the Cloud 9 g-beds, for those who like their gravity *high*). I
would say giving the passengers *no* control over their room gravity
would be a bit paranoid for me, but then I have discrete closed circuit
monitoring of all the rooms on my yacht if needed, so who's paranoid? :)
Besides, the beds that I recently posted look a lot like either canopy
beds, or playpens, or geodesic spheroids anyhoo; you don't just fall into
one like a regular bed, but get *into* it, close the safety screen/field 
generator, and turn it on.

>Why waste power on manipulating bed gravity when space could be
>conserved by simply having beds that fold down from the walls or recess
>into the floor?

Because, as others have stated, power is *cheeeeaaaap* in Traveller. 
My bed design I posted will support a metric ton of people (for those 
times when you have a few special friends over on batteries that will
run for 24hours of continuous use. Lesser use/weight will only 
increase the battery life/decrease the recharge time.

>I'm sure advances in materials and ergonomic design will allow future
>travellers to sleep in comfort on a few centimeters of SleepWell(tm)
>Narcoplast pressure responsive sleep surface that folds down from the
>wall.

Love it! Reminds me a lot of Computer By The Foot, and the instantly
transformable cloth/powder that was discussed on here a ways back for
portable keyboards, conformable control systems, and such. Consider
it swiped.

>And regardless of the gravity, you run into trouble at the point were
>the pilot needs to defecate. Urination is handled by a "pilot tube",
>but the other is rather more difficult to deal with. 

Take it from a nurse, fecal pouches are not any fun for anyone involved.

>Well, energy wise, a zero-g bed is *expensive*. It's equivalent to
>hauling a person 1000 miles straight up against a 1 g field (or
>boosting them to escape velocity). 

No, energy in Traveller is *cheap*, thanks to Fusion+. And as far as
the boosting to escape velocity, I see it more as a modification of 
contragrav, using a electronic "net" or a geodesic framework, or a 
series of "projectors" in the wall, or whatever to produce a contragrav
field within which the person floats. Kinda like that floating frog on
CNN the other day, but different :)

>It also gets nasty if the person
>slips out of the bed's "field", as they'll *regain* all that energy as
>kinetic energy. Which results in an interesting display as they turn
>into a meteor inside the confines of their bedroom.

No more so than an airraft would. If it doesn't turn into a meteor when
its contragrav gives out a meter above the ground, why should a person?

>On shipboard, for the same reasons that the ship's field doesn't extend
>far, it's much cheaper to turn off the field (actually, since you need
>to keep the inertial compensation, you really set it on "neutral").
>But on planets, you have this *huge* gravity field to fight against.

But we already have contragrav in the Canon :)
C'mon, Leonard, quit pissing in my oatmeal :) I've already established
on the List that I like my Traveller a bit softer than some if it means that
my players and I can have some of the really cool things we've "seen" in
a couple of decades of reading/watching sci-fi. We don't want 
Teleporters or drives that go "vroooomm" in a vacuum, but we demand
our thrustless drives and our interstellar drives and our zero-g amuse-
ment parks. I've made my bed, you can at least let me lie in it <g>

>>Why waste power on manipulating bed gravity when space could be
>>conserved by simply having beds that fold down from the walls or recess
>>into the floor?
>
>Why waste paper printing out those darned hardcopies... we've screens to
>read them on.
>
>No seriously - I know that anology fails a thousand times over, but one of
>the key "features" of the background of Traveller, especially T4, is that
>power is cheap. Amazingly cheap. Blindingly wasteful, conspicious
>consumption cheap. It'd sell, just cause it's cool...
>
>that is, until someone said it causes cancer.

And we still wouldn't quit using them, we'd just sue the manufacturers...
and use the winnings to buy more! <g>

>>Well, energy wise, a zero-g bed is *expensive*. It's equivalent to
>>hauling a person 1000 miles straight up against a 1 g field (or
>>boosting them to escape velocity). It also gets nasty if the person
>>slips out of the bed's "field", as they'll *regain* all that energy as
>>kinetic energy. Which results in an interesting display as they turn
>>into a meteor inside the confines of their bedroom.
>
>There's no particular evidence that Traveller grav technology works this
>way (or that any grav tech would have to.) There's lots of ways to get
>into "zero-G" without getting to escape velocity. For example, step out a

Indeed, most of the evidence points to Traveller grav tech being related
to the Thrusters in its inertialess quality.

>> second-story window and you're in free fall, albeit briefly, without much
>> energy cost. 
>
>umm, sorry.  You are spending all the potential energy you got by climbing
>up to the second story in the first place.

But Traveller has a long history of inertialess contragrav/thrusters.

>Leonard, you're right, but I don't think you've actually _seen_ how really
>amazingly mindbogglingly knock-your-socks-off _cheap_ energy is in T4 with
>the advent of Fusion+. I don't remember if you are in the FFS2 beta gang,
>but a minimum size TL-12 Fusion+ plant is only 0.01 m^3, costs 1000 Cr and
>puts out 48 KILOWATTS of power continuously. The thing weighs 20 kg, and
>occupies a cube 10 _cm_ on a side.

I considered using this in my designs, but thought that a storage bank made 
more sense for a home/shipboard setting. Now, for camping trips.... <g>

>	human bodys are not build for zero G, you'll either have the
>	musle problems because you have variating gravitiy, or even
>	more problem if you have low g for most time, when you are
>	back in normal g.

Belter Drug is already in the Canon, as someone has previously stated.
And in my campaign, I have Space Drug which does much the same and
more. I have faith that another few thousand years of medicine can give
us a solution; we've only been experimenting with low-g environments
for a couple of decades now; give us time  :)

>> Why waste power on manipulating bed gravity when space could be
>> conserved by simply having beds that fold down from the walls or recess
>> into the floor?
>
>Because modern scientific evidence has shown that zero gravity for 24
>hours a day is unhealthy.  I think that it is quite possible that zero
>gravity for 8 hours a day is also unhealthy.

Quite possible that periods of zero g is not healthy, but possibly not, too.
I do remember seeing where exercising for several hours a day minimized
the muscle and bone effects, just think of it as exercisizing for 16 hours a
day. In addition, we have drugs in Traveller to counteract the effects of 
zero-g on the body. The gods know that people in this country wil already
take a pill for every ill as it is...

>In the abscence of real
>world data indicating otherwise I do not see any reason to assume that
>zero gravity beds will catch on as I think it is likely they will be
>unhealthy.

C'mon now, you know that in the absence of real world data there is no
reason to believe that they wouldn't, either. Unhealthiness certainly hasn't
stopped people from smoking, drinking, eating at McD's, or baking them-
selves on the beach/in the tanning booth now, has it? <g> What was it
Barnum said about underestimating the public?

[NarcoPlast snipped}

>On the other hand this is a great advertising blurb and it is almost
>worth assuming zero gravity beds to have this set up.  I am not
>technologically conservative in general, I think that in the future
>people will do some everyday things vastly differently than we do today.
>
>However - I do not think that being in zero gravity unnecessarily is
>medically prudent.  Having the beds pop into the ceiling saves space
>(usefull) but does not require zero gravity sleeping (unhealthy till
>proven otherwise).

Thank you, Ralph Nader; "Unsafe At Any G" <vbg>

I think that the Far Future will be unimaginably different from now as 
well; it's just that I dare to presume to imagine it just like the next
guy<g>.
And my bit has grav beds. And I think we've shown that the effects can
be eliminated/minimized w/ Traveller medicine and tech. And as far as
taking "unnecessary meds" goes, I don't think that folks who inject 
silicon, saline, and collagen into their bodies, take daily drugs to 
prevent acne and hair loss, and eat substances that are *known* to 
cause abdominal cramping and sudden diarrhea just so that they can
eat twice as many potato chips, all in the name of vanity, would have
any problem with one more "supplement"  :)

>	Somehow, I knew it'd come to this. For some reason, (almost) 
>all players start asking about zero-G sex at some point. 

Go figure <g>

>	Actually, I've read some hard info on this from some aviation
>magazine years back.

I've been really needing to expand my reading lately <g>

>It would appear the Russians tried this in the
>mid-80s, and turned out to be a disaster. The body movements put the
>participants in a spinning motion; I understand the joyful moment
>was interrupted by breaking a wrist in addition to bruises and other
>painful things. :)
>	The Russians then designed a cradle with handholds and straps so 
>that two people could have sex in space. Not out of friendlines to 
>the lonely cosmonauts, but because the Russian space administration 
>had been told to experiment on zero-G breeding and childbirth. I 
>assume the experiment failed.

Ouch :) You'd definitely either want a large open space to try this (it's
a shame we let Skylab fall down), or else something like a sleeping bag
arrangement. In fact, that would seem far easier than a sleeping bag 
under gravity... *cough cough*

>	In a related story (not sure if it's true), in the late 70s there
>was a bit of a problem with the cosmonauts' libido. Out of touch
>with sexual contact, one astronaut managed to short-circuit some
>electronic systems by masturbating. The by-products scattered in
>zero-G and wandered among the sensitive electronics, with
>predictable results. From then on, Russian astronauts have been 
>provided with condoms.

Sounds like an urban myth, but a damn good one!

>	ObTrav:
>
>To have sex in zero-gravity environment: 
>Formidable: End, Zero-G Env (Fateful), 6 minutes
>
>Referee: This task assumes normal heterosexual intercourse. For
>oral sex, decrease difficulty by one level. The DMs may optionally
>be added to the time roll, thus allowing the PC to either prolong
>the task. Failure gives indicated damage in form of bruises and/or 
>fractures.

Perhaps we should require an End task roll to see if they are allowed
to get the bonus for taking extra time? <g> In addition, you've definitely
forgot to add in the bonus for cooperative tasks....

Marc, this is really good work here; can we get this included in T4.1 ?


**********************************************************
Paul Darius Owensby (pauld@athens.net)                   
ValuJump Lines:"So Economical, You'll Think You're Part of the Crew" (tm)
Pan-Imperia: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/Paul_Owensby/
Home of ValuJump Lines, Pan-Imperia Shipyards, and Beginnings for DOS.

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 09:24:20 -0700 (PDT)
From: Craig Berry <cberry@cinenet.net>
Subject: THUDDD update

Hi, all...

I've suffered a hard drive failure on my home machine, which is
significantly slowing my efforts to handle August THUDDD entries.  No
entries have been lost; I keep my mail on my ISP, thank goodness.  I'll
update these mailing lists when I get my PC back in gear; in the mean
time, assume that THUDDD ballots are going to be somewhat delayed.  Sorry
for the inconvenience.

- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
   |   Craig Berry - cberry@cinenet.net
 --*--    Home Page: http://www.cinenet.net/users/cberry/home.html
   |      Member of The HTML Writers Guild: http://www.hwg.org/   
       "Every man and every woman is a star."

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 97 11:49:21 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: Brawling vs Martial Arts skill

On 08/20/97 at 06:42 AM,  "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net> said:

>In my system APs are based on Dex+Int+Tactics.  This pool is used to move,
>shoot, and perform tasks inside each six-second combat turn.  Moving
>cautiously down a corridor, covering doorways costs 5AP per 1.5m square.
>Players plot out their moves, and announce them simultaniously.  If you
>run into a situation that voids what you were going to do, you lose all
>APs that you committed but haven't spent.  This keeps players from
>declaring "I'll run down the corridor, open the airlock, and throw the
>grenade through."  They are much mor e likely to keep a reserve of APs
>just in case.

>This system is based on my training and experiences as an infantryman
>along with research into the nature of combat.  In dangerous situations,
>people tend to get very cautious about movement and exposing themselves,
>and I've seen troops moving "on edge" to keep ready for the next surprise.

>If anyone is interested, I can clean it up a bit and post it to the list.

I'm very interested!  Even if you don't post it to the list, I'd like to
see a copy.

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

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 97 18:09 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: T4+

In-Reply-To: <19970818073824Z55613-21038+2162@utu.fi>

RFXn,

> I second that. Foss is a great artist, but some of his paintings 
> used in T4 actually predate Traveller.

I think nearly all of it does.
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 13:26:45 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: T41 Skills Draft F Fencing

	Fencing	Dex, Soc
	Fencing is a special case in combat=85 it is a ritualized dueling with b=
lade
weapons embraced by some members of the upper social classes.
	Weapon Appreciation. The individual can identify the various type of fen=
cing
weapons and easily offer polite conversation about their use and
craftsmanship.
	Duels. Individuals may elect to settle disputes between them with a duel.
Typically, such a duel is to the first blood.

	To fence to the first blood.
	(Dex + Fencing + Blade Cbt) - Parry < Formidable (3D)
	Opposed (2).
	Continue in rounds of 6 seconds. Highest success indicates first blood
drawn. Opposing success has no meaning.=20
	Blade Combat is in the weapon being used. Parry is the opponent=92s Fenc=
ing
skill.
	First blood inflicts 1 point of damage.

	An individual benefits from holding both Fencing and Blade Combat skills.
Dueling and edged weapon combat is more fully covered in Fighting.

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 12:51:22 -0500
From: Alex Ingram <ingram@airmail.net>
Subject: Re: Brawling vs Martial Arts skill

Douglas E. Berry wrote:
> 
> At 05:17 AM 8/20/97 -0400, Marc wrote:
> 
> >That, of course, is the challenge... as I approach the combat rules. My
> >intention (not having yet reviewed the combat rules in depth as yet) is to
> >rewrite combat as a task based activity which differentiates between the
> >various skills.
> 
> If I may jump the gun a bit here, I'd like to see the revised combat system
> go back to an "action point" style of system.  I've been fooling around
> with a varient personal combat system since T4 came out, and have had great
> results with mechanics based on Snapshot/AHL.
> 
> In my system APs are based on Dex+Int+Tactics.  This pool is used to move,
> shoot, and perform tasks inside each six-second combat turn.  Moving
> cautiously down a corridor, covering doorways costs 5AP per 1.5m square.
> Players plot out their moves, and announce them simultaniously.  If you run
> into a situation that voids what you were going to do, you lose all APs
> that you committed but haven't spent.  This keeps players from declaring
> "I'll run down the corridor, open the airlock, and throw the grenade
> through."  They are much mor e likely to keep a reserve of APs just in case.
> 
> This system is based on my training and experiences as an infantryman along
> with research into the nature of combat.  In dangerous situations, people
> tend to get very cautious about movement and exposing themselves, and I've
> seen troops moving "on edge" to keep ready for the next surprise.
> 
> If anyone is interested, I can clean it up a bit and post it to the list.

I for one use the Action Points from Snapshot with modifications and
have found them very playable. I would like to see your system and I'll
send you a copy of mine if you wish!

Alex Ingram
ingram@airmail.net

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1720
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, August 20 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1721



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: T41 Skills Draft M Medical (out of sequence due to request)
Re: LaGrange points
Apologies - list question
Re: Terra TL
Re: RoM/Terra TL
Re: 3I and Solomani
Re: Task Resolution
Re: Task Resolution
re: Task Resolution
E21 Idea
Re: alternate tech discussion
Re: Second Careers
Starship gravity control
Re: Second careers
Re: RoM/Terra TL
Re: RoM/Terra TL
T41 Skills Draft F Fighting
Re: 21st c. Terran technology, Vilani psychology, ...

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 12:57:29 -0500
From: Alex Ingram <ingram@airmail.net>
Subject: Re: T41 Skills Draft M Medical (out of sequence due to request)

CardSharks@aol.com wrote:
> 
>         Medical (Physical Sciences)     Edu, Dex
>         The character is trained in the treatment of injuries and illnesses.
> 
>         Immediate Action. The individual knows the steps to be taken immediately
> upon discovering an injured or ill subject, including stabilizing the
> condition, preventing further harm under the circumstances, and generally
> treating major immediate symptoms.
> 
>         To apply first aid (basic situation).
>         (Edu + First Aid) < Average (2D)
>         Medical may be substituted for First Aid.
> 
>         To apply first aid (difficult situation).
>         (Edu + First Aid) < Difficult (2.5D)
>         Allows possibility of Spectacular Success / Failure.
>         Medical may be substituted for First Aid.
> 
>         Diagnosis. The individual has been trained in, and has experience in,
> diagnosis based on apparent or reported symptoms, and on the results of
> laboratory and other tests.
> 
>         To gather appropriate information about illness/injury.
>         (Edu + Medical) < Difficult (2.5D)
>         Uncertain (1D)
> 
>         Treatment. The individual has been trained in, and has experience in,
> treatment of illness or injury based on a specific diagnosis.
> 
>         To prescribe appropriate treatment for illness
>         (Edu + Medical) < Difficult (2.5D)
>         Uncertain (1D)
> 
>         To prescribe appropriate treatment for injury
>         (Edu + Medical) < Average (2D)
> 
>         Default Species Specialties. By default, a characters medical ability lies
> in the diagnosis and treatment of his own race (thus humans best treat
> humans; vargr best treat vargr, etc). Medical skill can be used at half level
> when treating a patient outside of his species specialty. Veterinarian
> treatment (of animals) by an individual with Medical skill is also performed
> at half level.
> 
>         Medical is one of five members of the Physical Sciences skill cluster (the
> others are Biology, Chemistry, Geology, and Physics).
>         Medical and First Aid are related skills. Medical covers trained doctors
> (and nurses) with expertise in the diagnosis and treatment of illness and
> injury. First Aid covers emergency treatment and immediate action by
> laypersons and paramedics.
>         Medical and Psychology are related skills. Medical covers physical ailments
> (some diseases or malfunctions of the brain are physical ailments with mental
> manifestations and are treated by Medical); Psychology covers mental
> ailments.
>         Any level of Medical is the equivalent of First Aid-1.

You need to add cryogenics as a separate skill or include it in the
description of medical. You should also consider pharmacy or
pharmacology as a part of medical. Also psychology does not deal with
mental illness, that's psychiatry! I personally use the term Medicine as
the professional physician and Medical as the technician level.

Alex Ingram
ingram@airmail.net

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 12:16:01 -0600
From: lguatney@carbon.cudenver.edu (Leroy William Lu Guatney)
Subject: Re: LaGrange points

On Tue, 19 Aug 1997 23:37:12 -0500
deadeye@ebicom.net writes:
>Subject: Re: LaGrange Points
>
>Thomas Walter Trelenberg wrote:
>> 
>> Could some of the more astromonically minded of the TML expain what
>> Trojan (LaGrange) points are and why everyone wants to put spacestations
>> there....I've looked in my mechanics books and none of them give a
>> definition of LaGrange points that really is all that helpful (to me).
>> 
>> Thanks
>> 
>> TT
>
[snip of good overview]
>
>A little real evidence for the existence of these points are Jupiter's
>so called "Trojan points", trailing and preceding the orbit of Jupiter
>around the sun by 60 degrees.  There be rocks there.  60 degrees at
>Jupiter's orbit is a lot of space, which is why it was silly to see
>Jupiter from its Trojan in S:AAB.

One shouldn't think of the Jupiter's Trojan Asteroids as a "point" in
space 60 degrees to either side.  The region these asteroids occupy
conjures up focused "radar-like" lobes along Jupiter's orbital path.
Perhaps a better image would be the blade of a chain saw.

I didn't see the particular S:AAB scene, so I don't know if this helps,
but the Trojans oscillate considerably ahead and behind Jupiter, and they
sometimes move closer than the notion of the 60 degree LaGrange points
confer.

As for putting spacestations there, the Earth-Luna system is better than
the Jovian system, unless your station can move or withstand occasional
rock-crushing. <G>


Leroy Guatney - lwlg@usa.net
 University of Mars, NorthAm Campus
 Class of '98

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 13:30:26 -0500 (CDT)
From: dmckinne@prairienet.org (Donald E. McKinney)
Subject: Apologies - list question

In preparation for job upheavals, I'd transferred my subscription
address to "dmckinne@prairienet.org" from "dmckinne@cmi.csc.com".
Now, while everything at the "prairienet.org" address gets forwarded
fine, I can't send to the list from my old account... 

Any way I can get the TML at the new address while still posting
from the old?

Again, apologies for interrupting with the "technical support" 
question...


DonM. 


- --
=============================================================================
= Donald E. McKinney, Release Coordinator, Communications Industry Services =
= (217) 351-8250 x2365  Computer Sciences Corporation dmckinne@csci.csc.com =
= Official Kibitzer for Digest Group Publications   dmckinne@prairienet.org =

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 12:51:48 -0600
From: lguatney@carbon.cudenver.edu (Leroy William Lu Guatney)
Subject: Re: Terra TL

On Wed, 20 Aug 1997 22:40:43 +0800
Michael Bailey <mickb@opera.iinet.net.au> writes:
>
>Both sides have made good arguments here...thought I'd throw in my A$.02,
>which happens to straddle the difference in opinion quite nicely *g*
[snip of a nice assessment]
>Opinion only, remember...


Agreed, and understood!


>Michael T. Bailey (mickb@opera.iinet.net.au)
>
>"You drive", he said, "I think there's something wrong with me"
>                        Hunter S. Thompson - 'Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas'

I've been meaning to tell that I am a H.S. Thompson fan too.  He lives close
to here, up in Aspen in the mountains.

Back to the Terra ideas.  Your post made me think of a quicky that I wrote
just yesterday.

It seems hopeless to try and discuss a "unified" view of the published record
of Traveller.  Given that certain "revisions" happened over time for the game,
I don't see a feasible way to keep _all_ of it in tact.  Try this on for size.

   "In the early years of the Sylean Federation, historians, working from
    incomplete records on Sylea and the dozen or so original Federation
    worlds, were able to prove using individual sources, that the empire
    called the Rule of Man was TL12, TL13, TL14, TL15, and TL16."

   "The problem is that they were all right and all wrong.  Of course, the
    reality is that an Empire is made of up many worlds, and all of these
    were found in the Rule of Man."

   "It wasn't until the Sylean Scout Service (IISS) contacted the 183 worlds
    of the newly forming Third Imperium, and compiled the cross-referenced
    data in the year 59, that enough actual verifiable, archeological fact
    was uncovered to show that the Second Imperium was in fact TLX."
 
                             --Yoshi McElroy, translated by Leroy Guatney
             excerpted from the essay on Tech Assessment, IISS Explorer's
             Handbook, published Regina/Regina 1100


Now, the above writing was tastefully done, and fits into _whatever_ view
of the Rule of Man's TL you happen to buy into.

Afterall, we have talked about a number of sources scattered across four
editions of the game.  Somewhere the line has to be drawn.

I am finished with this discussion.  Whenever the X (above) gets filled in,
I suggest if you don't like it, use the various sources presented throughout
the course of this discussion to make things work for your campaign.

One last comment.  I have gotten the feeling that it was not appreciated by
some when I told Harold many weeks ago that what he had written was good for
his campaign.  I want to explain that for me, that is the ultimate compliment.
All that I mean when I say something like that is, "I would play your campaign
using that interpretation, because Traveller _is_ about what we want it to be."

I have had the privilege of writing for the first three eras of the game, and
I know I would have liked to contribute more, but I also know that we can't
all be the Architect.  That is hopefully one person's job, and will stay that
way.  This game abounds with possibilities, and I hope it stays that way,
while all the time growing.

IMO


Leroy Guatney - lwlg@usa.net
 University of Mars, NorthAm Campus
 Class of '98

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 21:18:33 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: RoM/Terra TL

Leroy Guatney writes:
>Using the same MT source that says RoM was only TL12, the Imperium was TL15
>at this time.  

The Imperium reached TL 15 around Year 1000. That means they began upgrading
their navy to TL 15 around that time. Some of their navy, that is, because
only a few Imperial planets would be able to build TL 15 ships from the
start (In 1100 they still have some TL 14 ships). So the Solomani Border
War would be fought with mostly TL 14 ships. As for TL 15 troops, who knows?
If we use the explanation I came up with (that an interstellar society's TL
is measured by it's highest space technology, whereas individual planets'
are measured by that planet's highest overall TL) then both the Imperium
and the Solomani may have had some TL 15 troops. But if Terra's home
defense units had a TL of 14 then that is solid evidence  -  I'd go so
far as to call it proof  -  that Terra's military TL at that time was 14.

>Remember also, that Terra (and the Solomani Sphere) were part
>of the Imperium up until the Solomani Confederation was founded in 871.

Right. And since the Imperium reached TL 14 around 700 then it makes sense
that some planets in the Solomani Sphere was TL 14 too. And the evidence
works both ways, of course; if Terra had been TL 15 before 871 then TL 15
knowledge would have been available to the Imperial authorities and at
least some Imperial planets would have been TL 15 too.

>Now if you are telling me that a bunch of Terrans at TL14 can take on the
>Third Imperium at one entire tech level disadvantage--well let's just say
>that is like the Terrans in their 4900 ton ships taking on 74,900 ton Vilani
>ships. 

That's not true, at least not by CT combat rules. Steve Higginbotham once
estimated that given optimal ship design (not always a given ;-), TL 12
ships have a 12/1 advantage over TL 9 ships while TL 15 ships have a 3/1
advantage over TL 14 ships (I have no idea how things are under T4 ship
design and combat rules). Nor is 'a bunch of Terrans' the proper appelation 
for the combined forces of the whole Solomani Sphere. And in any case, the
Imperial forces would not be solid TL 15... or even borderline TL 15.

>Sorry, but it is clear to me, that Terra was TL15+ at the outset of the
>Solomani Rim War, c. 998.

Let me get this straight: You claim that Terra was TL 15+, despite the fact
that Terra's defenses were only TL 14? 

I've got a suggestion: Pretend you have to present the best possible case for 
the RoM being TL 12 and examine every bit of evidence in that light. List it 
in two columns side by side with the 'RoM was TL 15+' case and see for
yourself. Perhaps that will help. 


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
  "Free speech gives a man the right to talk about the
'psycology' of an amoeba, but I don't have to listen".
                  Elihu Nivens in 'The Puppet Masters'

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 21:39:20 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: 3I and Solomani

Steven Hudson writes:
>  Peeling off territory that rightly belonged to the Race (i.e., every
>human inhabited, or uninhabited star system in this galaxy, at least)
>is certainly a moral duty of any loyal Sol-Sec representative. Given
>the fact of the Rebellion, they could always helpfully prevent Imperial
>collapse by supporting one or more factions; being effectively undamaged
>they could certainly afford it.

Politics in the Solomani Confederation was a tad more complex than you
appear to think. They had their doves as well as their hawks. And a
sizable number of loyal Solomani considered the Sphere to be the natural
border of the Confederation.

(I _yhink_ the above is canon, but I can't remember the references offhand,
so I may be wrong. Perhaps it was just what we worked out on the Pocket
Empire mailing list).


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 20:07:36 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

> 1. It uses the half die.
> 
> 2. Tasks are too easy.
> 
> 3. Tasks use full strength Char and Full Strength Skill in the task statement
> (corollary: skills are unqually represented compared to characteristics).


4.  Skills should be kept in the same range as CT (i.e. 1-6, or 
so--where a level 3 is considered a professional skill level, level 
1 is considered a beginner, and level 5 or higher is considered a 
beginner).

5.  The task statement should be modified so that skills and stats 
are equally represented.

Kenneth.

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 20:07:35 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

> 2. Tasks are too easy.

> Without discussion or elaboration of these points, I invite simple 1-sentence
> additions to this list so it can continue to be discussed.

I know you said above that you do not want discussion or elaboration, 
but it should be pointed out that tasks in T4.1 are not too easy.  
The way you have it set up, success chance falls in a desirable 
range.

This should not be a point of contention--and I say this based on 
your earlier post a few days ago stating that skills will still 
average around level 2 (and some people have written in saying that 
level 4 is about as high as most skills go).

Kenneth.

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 15:53:11 -0400
From: "Glenn Crawford" <glennc@nelvana.com>
Subject: re: Task Resolution

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 11:04:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Task Resolution

1. It uses the half die.
I may not know art but I know what I do not like; And it is D3's. It also
does not have the same effect on the bell curve as would a normal die 6

2. Tasks are too easy.
Players are notoriously good at rolling high stats. This skews the whole
system. And makes the guy who lucked out able to trash his more skill based
compatriots, forever. 

3. Tasks use full strength Char and Full Strength Skill in the task
statement (corollary: skills are unqually represented compared to
characteristics).
I want stats to mean something (ie same skill but smarter, smarter wins) but
I would prefer that experience beats raw talent. 

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 15:45:34 -0400
From: "Glenn Crawford" <glennc@nelvana.com>
Subject: E21 Idea

Quoted Section:
>Major Power: United States (54 States; 2 states split, 2 others 		join.)
Power lies with individual State 
> governments, but 		trend is reversing.
Fair enough. What are the new states though?

> Other Powers: Canada, Mexico, Cuba.
> 	Military Strength (relative): USA, Mexico, Canada, Cuba.
> 	Economic Strength (relative): USA, Canada, Mexico, Panama.
> 	Major Space Powers: USA
Sounds reasonable

>	Minor Space Powers: Canada, Mexico, Panama.
A suggestion, distinguish between cooperative space nations (ie nations that
can go into space on their own but generally cooperate to get there, and
hangers on (nations that rent facilities only, natio s on the
equator would be like this a lot) 

> Potential Space Powers: Cuba, Trinadad/Tobago.
Cuba, maybe. T&T? Hanger on only

>	Economic Alliances: NAFTA(USA, Canada, Mexico, Panama, Costa Rica)
Don't forget Chile is a near member now

> CC {Caribian Coalitian}(Cuba, Haiti, Dominican Rep, Jamaca,
Trinadad/Tobago)
As an anoyance maube. Not as a power

> 	Military Alliances: Kiska Accord (USA, Canada, Russia, Japan):
Makes sense. As a side note, about two years ago Japan and India were
talking about a mutual defence treaty but they abandoned it when Red China
started freaking out.

	Space Cooperation Efforts: NAFTA, USA/Russia partnership.
> again, makes sense. Nothing too weird

Reality Check: OK
Imagination Check: OK
Let's get this baby off the ground!

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 16:15:53 -0400
From: Daniel Ray Lane <drlane@pinn.net>
Subject: Re: alternate tech discussion

Leonard Erickson wrote:
> 
> In mail you write:
> 
> > I somehow don't think we'll be using silicon chips in 100 years.
> 
> Why not? We still use wirewound resistors and paper dielectric
> capacitors in some applications. We even use tubes sometimes.
> 
> And things like copper oxide rectifiers have been in use for over 100
> years. So I figure that silicon based devices will hang on in some
> niches. Even now its usually simpler to use 74xxx chips for interfacing
> the cutting edge stuff than to build a custom chip for the job (at
> least until you get into massive production runs).
> 
> I'd not be surprised to find an 80x86 type chip inside the room
> thermostat, for instance. :-)
> 
> --
> Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
>  shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
> leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

OK.  200 years.   :)

Actually, magamps, tubes, and some of these older technologies
produce some high quality signals in specialized components and
are highly resistant to shock damage as well as EMP.  So there
are uses for them.  I'm just not sure how old these technologies
are, but my guess is less than a century.  

Perhaps my point would be better made to suggest we consider
the next cutting edge tech to come along rather than forcing
the RoM to use old 80x86's cannibalized from IBM PCs.  (A TL 7
RoM).

- -Dan Lane




- -Dan Lane

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 22:38:16 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Second Careers

Allen Shock writes:
>YES!!! Thank you! The only suggestion I would have is that you might want to
>have it be a straight -2 per career after the first, thus -4 to enter a
>third career. This would make three career characters rarer, and thus
>prevent abuse. (I unofficially limit the characters in my campaign to two
>careers anyway.)

I haven't had the time to study the draft of T4.1 CharGen rules, so maybe
the explanation is there, but if T4.1 is anything like T4 then I don't 
understand what you mean by abuse. (It is easy to understand how you could
abuse the TNE CharGen with multiple careers, of course). Except for a bit
of trouble with the mustering out rules I don't see why someone shouldn't
change careers as often as he likes. In my own campaign I limit careers
changes by requiring the character to start at the bottom rung of the
new career unless it has one or more skills useful to the new career at a 
reasonable level, and by using ordinary common sense, but as I said, I don't
understand where the abuse comes in. Can you enlighten me?


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 13:49:34 -0700 (PDT)
From: Tony Zbaraschuk <tonyz@eskimo.com>
Subject: Starship gravity control

<Loads fact-ball into the canon>

The _Traveller Adventure_ description of the March Harrier (your average
400-ton subsidized merchant) stated that the floor field could be set
from 0 G to 2.0 G anywhere on the ship, with the rooms having
individual gravity control.

Now, I always took this to mean that every cabin had a little dial by
the door marked "Gravity" along with the ones marked "Temperature",
"Air Pressure", and so on, and that the passengers could set their
own inside their caibn..  I'm perfectly comfortable with the
idea that the crew can override the local gravity control from the bridge.

<Fires fact-ball, laden with supposition>


Tony Z

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 22:50:02 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Second careers

Marc Miller writes:
>Rolls for a second career (enlistment, injury, promotion, and continuance)
>are subject to a DM of -2; all rolls for a third career are subject to a DM
>of -3. All other DMs, qualifications, and preferences apply.

I don't understand why you wan't to discourage players from generating
characters with multiple careers. Why is that? 

>Are some second careers precluded?

Some second careers are mandated. In Denmark you can't become a police
officer without having served in the military (Mind you, the term of
service in the military can be as little as a year). 
> 
>Any other comments?

In some societies multiple careers could be mandatory. How about a society 
where _everybody_ is required to serve a term in one of the militaries? 
(Didn't the Soviet Union use to have something like that?) And in some cases 
you might even want to give enlistment bonuses to a second career for certain
prior careers (f.ex. a term in the army might _improve_ your chances of
becoming a law enforcer).


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

 

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 14:00:26 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: Re: RoM/Terra TL

>Now if you are telling me that a bunch of Terrans at TL14 can take on the
>Third Imperium at one entire tech level disadvantage--well let's just say
>that is like the Terrans in their 4900 ton ships taking on 74,900 ton Vilani
>ships. (In fact, I would venture a guess that the Vilani would need only
>one ship!)  Remember, I just reread the entire Invasion: Earth game, so this
>is not IIRC going on here.

The Zhodani (mostly TL14) did fine against the Imperium (mostly TL15)
through the 4th and 5th Rim Wars...TL15 vs 14 isn't that big a technology
advantage; Jump-6 helps very little (you can never design a decent warship
to take advantage of it), armour and lasers don't improve, the only big
advantage is smaller power plants. The Solomani Sphere had lots of high-pop
worlds, which are the only ones that count economically - no surprise they
did reasonably well (but one should note, still lost lots of 
territory...)

>Sorry, but it is clear to me, that Terra was TL15+ at the outset of the
>Solomani Rim War, c. 998.

Not clear to *anyone* else - there's no evidence beyond your own wishful
thinking.

Bruce

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 13:55:45 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: Re: RoM/Terra TL

>I only focused on the Inv: Earth game, since that is the only post-RoM
>published source of Terra's TL until 1107/1110.  I:E reinforces the
quote of 1107 Terra's TL being 15, which is about as far as they wanted
>to get specific on the subject.

I:E certainly doesn't reinforce the idea that Terra was TL-15 at the time
of the invasion. *Some* of the counters have to be native Terran troops - 
it's just impossible for the Solomani to have evacuated all the troops in
question, given the flow of the war - and native troops pretty much always 
have the TL of their homeworld (look at all the planetary forces in FFW.) 
I'll grant that the Imperium was (early) TL-15 if that's what MT says
(anyone else check the dates?), but it must be pretty early; I say again that
the invasion of Earth was the single most important ground battle for the
Imperium to win, and if they had TL-15 troops they would have deployed them.

>None whatsoever.  [all solomani worlds in the Rim in 1107] were all TL14 max.  One world over the border in
>Aldebaran sector, adjacent to the Near Bootes cluster was TL15.  That was
>in GDW's newsletter "Imperial Lines" #2.

So, in order to assume a TL-15 terra in the Rim War, you have to assume that
it was the *only* world in the Solomani Sphere that was TL-15 - which seems
odd. 

And that it chose not to build any TL-15 home defence forces, and that
every single scrap of TL-15 military equipment it *did* build was evacuated - 


This seems somewhat implausible to me. The preponderance of evidence really
does suggest that Terra was TL-14 at the time of the invasion.


Bruce

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 17:25:54 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: T41 Skills Draft F Fighting

x	Fighting Cascade
	The Fighting skill cascade indicates a general familiarity with personal
combat using the hands or makeshift weapons such as clubs. Within the ski=
ll
cascade, the individual is skilled in a specific type of fighting (Brawli=
ng,
Melee, or Environmental Combat) and has a somewhat lower skill in the oth=
er
areas.
	Brawling encompasses unarmed, unstructured hand-to-hand combat. Melee is
structured hand-to-hand combat (boxing, wrestling, martial arts).
Environmental Combat involves fighting in High G or Zero-G, or special
situations (such as underwater).
		Opponent Evaluation. One aspect of a skill is the ability to evaluate a
situation and its participants and their relative ability or skill level.

	To visually evaluate skill level of a potential fighter.
	(Int + Fighting) < Difficult (2.5D)
	Result is subject=92s Fighting skill level(s) (+D-D)

	The result of a snap evaluation (without seeing the subject in action) i=
s
the real skill level +/- 5.

	To evaluate skill level of a fighting participant.
	(Int + Fighting) < Difficult (2.5D)
	Result is subject=92s Fighting skill level(s) (+D-S)+ (-D+S) 	S=3D evalu=
ator=92s
Fighting skill level.

	For example, Emarq Chredian (who has Brawling-4) is watching a man in a
fight but does not know the man has Brawling-6. After success in the
evaluation task, Emarq rolls 1D (=3D4) -4 =3D0 and 1D (=3D5) +4=3D +1. Em=
arq
evaluates the man as Brawling-7.
	Note that this process has the greatest chance of producing an accurate
reading (17%) and is the equivalent of D-D. Evaluations of less than zero=
 are
zero.
	The game master is responsible for determining the results of evaluation=
s in
order to conceal the true results from the players.

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 14:34:13 -0700
From: Scott Ellsworth <Scott_Ellsworth@alumni.hmc.edu>
Subject: Re: 21st c. Terran technology, Vilani psychology, ...

[I have little enough memory of HG ship combat, as I used my own home brew
system, summarized as "roll a hell of a lot of dice, and make up the
answer" when I was DMing Traveller before the MT days.  This is gonna be a
bit off topic, I am afraid.]

At 09:44 PM 8/18/97 -0600, Leroy wrote:
>              4) Questioning slavishly believed dogma is the key to
>                 the scientific method.  I love Galileo, he really
>                 is a hero (and more so these days).

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion, and I am not going to gainsay
you.  I do, however, have a different spin on Galileo than many.  Partly
because I was both a confirmed Anglican and a Physicist, I was always in
the center of the "religion vs. science issue."  Made Galileo sort of a
special study for me, as I had thought that the popular view (brave
scientist punished by Luddite church) was correct.

After some years of thought and study, I realized why my Physics professors
disagreed, and really did not care what religion their students followed.
The two patterns of thought address completely separate areas, typically.
For example, if you bind your religion to a scientific truth, then when
more is discovered about that truth, you are in worlds of hurt.  Likewise,
a scientific hypothesis backed with religious fervor often hides real data.

Galileo was one of the first examples of a person thinking that physical
and political smarts are the same.  He was quite bright, but he made some
incredible tactical blunders.  For example, he had Simplicio quote the
official church positions on a couple of issues, using the Church phrasing
so that the reader could not possibly miss it.  Not wise...

Especially not wise when one of his close discussion companions was the
Pope of the day, a man as arrogant as Galileo, and who it was not terribly
wise to piss off.  By publishing in the way he did, Galileo guaranteed a
hostile response from an arrogant man, and because of his own arrogance, he
did not manage the publicity surrounding his discovery well enough to
escape the anger of his former companion.  The Pope of the time was usually
placatable, as long as he was "in the loop," but was not terribly forgiving
when left out of it and insulted.

He might have escaped some controversy if his models were clearly better.
Unfortunately, it was not yet qualitatively simpler than the models he was
working against.  The heliocentric model would not get simpler until the
planetary orbits were considered ellipses.  This limited his "See. I am
right!" ability.  Once that fillip is added things got so much simpler that
it was hard to attack him and his model, even if he was a bit aggressive in
stating it.

Since this is off topic, I invite those interested to respond via email.  I
do recommend the book "Coming of Age in the Milky Way" by Timothy Ferris,
as a rather neat examination of the various universe sizes contemplated by
people at various times in history.  It also goes into the political skill
or lack thereof of the people who were pushing the various ideas.

>Thanks for the blast down memory lane. <G>  I just could not resist
>chiming in here. <G>

Neither could I, neither could I.

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

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1721
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, August 20 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1722



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Apologies - list question
Ken's TL Based Pricing
Re: LaGrange Points
Early Charges?
Re: RoM/Terran TL
Re: M-Drives & QSDS
Aaargh, FFS2, the saga continues

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 14:39:12 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: Re: Apologies - list question

ask Rob Miracle to please add the old address to your 'Allowed to post
from' list...I had to do that last year when they changed our domain
names, and what we were sending out as.

the address to mail to can be gotten by sending mail to
traveller-request@mpgn.com with the word 'help' in the body of the
message. I think there may even be an automated way to do what you want to
do, documented in the help message.


Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs


On Wed, 20 Aug 1997, Donald E. McKinney wrote:

> 
> 
> In preparation for job upheavals, I'd transferred my subscription
> address to "dmckinne@prairienet.org" from "dmckinne@cmi.csc.com".
> Now, while everything at the "prairienet.org" address gets forwarded
> fine, I can't send to the list from my old account... 
> 
> Any way I can get the TML at the new address while still posting
> from the old?
> 
> Again, apologies for interrupting with the "technical support" 
> question...
> 
> 
> DonM. 
> 
> 
> --
> =============================================================================
> = Donald E. McKinney, Release Coordinator, Communications Industry Services =
> = (217) 351-8250 x2365  Computer Sciences Corporation dmckinne@csci.csc.com =
> = Official Kibitzer for Digest Group Publications   dmckinne@prairienet.org =
> 

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

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 22:09:53 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
Subject: Ken's TL Based Pricing

There's a line in CT Book 4:  Mercenary that states, "In general, 
prices will tend to drop by 5-15% at each tech level after the level 
of introduction of an item, with examples of the item sold at the 
regular base price generally incorporating improvements or 
representing deluxe models."

I wanted to incorporate this idea into my campaign, so I went looking 
for additional Traveller articles on the subject.  I only found one 
other article, in BJTAS #1, by Frank Chadwick, but that article 
focussed more on the buying power of the Imperial credit vs local 
currency than it did the actual variation of an item's price on 
different worlds.

Given that, I used the concepts in these two articles and came up 
with my own pricing chart, based on the TL of the item and the TL of 
the world it is being purchased on.

Let's say you are on a TL 10 world and you want to buy a TL 9 map 
box.  You'd expect to pay less for it than the printed Traveller 
base price, wouldn't you?  I would, so I designed these rules to 
accommodate.

I also realize that economics are not as cut and dry as that, so I 
added another factor that could actually increase the price of the TL 
9 map box on the TL 10 world.

As always, I've designed this system to be simple, easily 
understood and introduced, and fully integrateable with your 
Traveller campaign.

The TL Based Pricing system takes two steps, which are covered below.

===============================================================
Ken's TL Based Pricing For Traveller
===============================================================

Assumptions.

I've made a few assumptions when designing this rule.
1.  The Traveller printed based price is the price of the item at its 
     introductory TL on a world with a Class A starport.

2.  The starport of a world effects the prices of goods in several, 
     sometimes undefinable ways.  (Ex:  It may affect prices directly 
     because of the item being imported, or it may affect prices 
     indirectly because of the import of parts used in the item.  
     Something may be imported for one industry then found to be 
     useful in another industry, etc.)

3.  The price of an item will generally go down if purchased on a 
     lower tech level world.

4.  The price of an item will generally go up if purchased on a 
     higher tech level world.

5.  The GM will have final say in what items are available on a 
     world.  (Just because the item wanted is of lower tech than the 
     world's tech level, it does not mean that the item is available. 
     Likewise, there may be limits on what can be imported to the 
     world.  Various local laws may apply.  This is the realm of the 
     GM.)

===============================================================

Tables.

- ----------------------------------------------------------
STARPORT TABLES
- ----------------------------------------------------------

D6       A          B          C          D          E          X
- -----    ----        ----       ----       ----       ----      ----
1-3     1.00      .95        .90       .85        .80      .75  



D6       A          B          C          D          E          X
- -----    ----        ----       ----       ----       ----      ----
4-5     1.00      .90        .80       .70       .60      .50



D6       A          B          C          D          E          X
- -----    ----        ----       ----       ----       ----      ----
6        1.00      .85        .70       .55       .40       .25    



- ----------------------------------------------------------
TECH LEVEL TABLES
- ----------------------------------------------------------

                                                    D6
                               ----------------------------------
TL difference          1-3               4-5               6
- ----------------          -----              -----            -----
        0                     1.00              1.00            1.00
        1                     .95                .90              .85
        2                     .90                .80              .70
        
        3                     .85                .70              .55
        4                     .80                .60              .40
        5                     .75                .50              .25

        6                     .70                .40              .10
        7                     .65                .30              .09
        8                     .60                .20              .08

        9                     .55                .10              .07
       10                    .50                .07              .06 
       11                    .45                .06              .05

       12                    .40                .05              .04
       13                    .35                .04              .03
       14                    .30                .03              .02

       15                    .25                .02              .01

==============================================================

Rules.

Step 1 (Starport factor):  Roll 1 D6 and use corresponding starport 
            table.  Divide Traveller base price by the factor under 
            the world's starport code.  This will result in the 
            item's adjusted base price.

Step 2  (TL factor):  Roll 1 D6 and use corresponding TL table.  
            Figure the difference between the item's TL and the 
            world's TL, either up or down.  

            If the world's TL is higher than that of the item, 
            MULTIPLY the factor from the TL table by the adjusted 
            base price (from step 1).  This will give you the final 
            price of the item.

            If the world's TL is lower than that of the item, and the 
            GM is allowing this item as an import, DIVIDE the 
            adjusted base price (from step 1) by the factor from the 
            TL table.  This will give you the final price of the 
            item.

===============================================================

Notes.

You can use these tables in a number of ways.  One way, which may be 
cumbersome for some people, is to calculate each price for every item 
purchased or shopped.  This means rolling for a starport table for 
each item, then rolling for a TL table for each item, then 
calculating the price of each item.

On the other end of the spectrum, a GM can save himself some 
headaches and still use the pricing charts by rolling once for the 
starport table and once for the TL table.  Then the GM can copy down 
the final factor and use it for everything purchased on the 
world (one price factor for the entire world).  

A middle-ground approach combines the two options above and may 
provide a good compromise between the realism that comes with heavy 
dice rolling/calculations and the broad method of having only one 
price factor for everything on the world.  GMs can pre-roll the 
factors for items in each of the item categories given in the MT 
World Builder's Handbook.  Under this method, a GM would 
pre-calculate a price factor for items that fall under the Personal 
Military category, the Space Transport category, the Medical 
category, and so on.  In this way, all items under a single category 
will have one price factor, but price factors between categories may 
be different--yeilding different prices between items.

Using these rules will provide economic differences between worlds 
that are otherwise the same.  You can have two planets, side by side, 
with the same TL and the same starport, but they may have varying 
prices for the same item.

In this way, these rules are intended to add more realism to your 
game.  Players may find that one place that they can buy weapons and 
ammo at real low prices, but it is on the other side of the 
subsector.  As with all role-playing, these rules should be used to 
compliment your game.  If you find them to be a nuisance, and you are 
bogged down in dice rolling, I suggest you use one of the less 
complicated options for using these rules that I have detailed above 
or drop the system all together.

As always, I welcome comments, criticisms, and suggestions.

Kenneth.

PS  For those who are interested, I have these other game tweaks that 
I use in my game.  They are available to anybody just for the asking. 
 E-mail me in private if you would like a copy of any of these.

Stun Damage Musings

Ken's Combat Tweaks

Hand to Hand Attacks

T4 Task System Fix (KBv2.0)

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 15:51:56 -0600
From: Glenn Hoppe <starcity@sk.sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: LaGrange Points

XatoKuom@aol.com wrote:
> 
> I believe the LaGrange points are located at the points in space where the
> gravitational forces are next to zero.  That is the point between the Earth
> and the Moon when the gravitational attraction is equal from both sources.
> 
> Scott Quigg(XatoKuom@aol.com)

Close, but not quite. 

Lagrange points are the points where there is no acceleration, where
gravitational and centrifugal forces "cancel". For any two masses, there
are three points of minimum potential: L1 L2 L3. These points are
unstable. Any whack from a piece of space debris or a passing body will
disturb an object orbiting at that point, flinging it into one the
gravitational wells or off into space.

Stable Lagrange points (L4 & L5) are at a potential *maximum* not
minimum. If a body at that point is perturbed slightly, it will just
execute a stable (not necessarily closed) orbit around the L4 or L5
point.

For Example, the Trojan Asteroids *share* Jupiter's orbit. They orbit
the L4 and L5 points of the Sun-Juptier system, 60 degrees behind and
ahead of Jupiter in its orbit. Some of the Trojans make complicated
orbits taking as long as 110 years to meander around the Lagrange point.
(While orbiting the sun every 11.86 years like Jupiter)

I hope I got the above right, I cribbed parts from some Astronomy notes
on the web...

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 18:08:08 +0000
From: twolf@unix.tfs.net
Subject: Early Charges?

Sorry for the interruption.

This has probably already been discussed but I am wondering if anyone 
else has been charged for Citizens of the Imperium ($15) around 15 
July?  I emailed IG about it and I just got an email from  
flagella@concentric.net about it.  (Anyone know who that is?)

I had asked about went the stuff was that I was charged for.  Their 
response for the delay was:
> 
> Because there has been a delay with receiving our color printer due
> to UPS.  Sorry for the inconvenience.
> 

I thought that the UPS strike started 2 August...that is over 2 weeks 
after I was charged.  Before I go to the BBB I was wondering if 
anyone else experience this?

My email is Twolf@tfs.net.

JD
Twolf

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 00:44:36 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: RoM/Terran TL

Bruce wrote:

>Does anyone with access to Supplement 10 remember if there were any TL-15
>worlds on the Solomani side of the border even in 1107?)

None in S10, but *lots* of TL14

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"Omnia Mutantur Nihil Interit"  -  Sandman 'The Wake'
"Everything Changes, but nothing is truly lost" 

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 18:23:08 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: M-Drives & QSDS

Douglas wrote:

>At 07:01 PM 8/18/97 +0100, you wrote:
>>Looking at QSDS1.5...
>>
>>What manuever drives do TL9 jump capable ships use if Heplar starts at
>TL10...?
>
>Fusion rockets, Ion drives, or in one memorable system, solar sails.

But they aren't in QSDS, which was the point... You can jump at TL9 but
under the rules you can't get out of the gravity well...

(This is where I turn over a page in QSDS and find them!)

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"Omnia Mutantur Nihil Interit"  -  Sandman 'The Wake'
"Everything Changes, but nothing is truly lost" 

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 16:57:12 -0700 (PDT)
From: Craig Berry <cberry@cinenet.net>
Subject: Aaargh, FFS2, the saga continues

> Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 17:28:16 -0700
> From: JayStr <jaystr@best.com>
> 
> >FFS2 was stated to be the no-math-barred gearhead design system.  A
> >developer's tool as it were.  It was never, ever, pitched or talked
> >about as anything else (here or on the beta list).
> 
> A high-complexity developer's tool without a system to use it. This is
> so manifestly pointless as to be frightening.

FFS2 has a system with which to use it.  That system is called "physics."
There's a game supplement out for it, authors Halliday and Resnick. :)

Seriously, people who want the design detail provided by FFS2 are
(largely) the same people who have the tools -- mental and physical --
with which to turn units like gee-hours and light-seconds into travel
times, vehicle ranges, combat system elements, and so forth.  Personally,
I'm *far* happier seeing real-world units in a design system, perhaps
supplemented by conversions to game-system stats.  If I know a laser is
factor-37, I'm helpless to decide if it can be applied to a nonstandard
task (long-range signalling, say, or pushing a lightsail).  If I know it
emits 10-microsecond pulses, each carrying 5 MJ of energy, at a frequency
of 0.2 pulses per second, then I can apply actual *physics* to get an
answer.

The other (and related) beauty of real-world units is that you can build
game-unit systems on top of them at will, including mutually exclusive
ones, and translate between them via the "ground truth" of real-world
units.  So if I know a factor-37 laser in Bob's Cool Space Combat system
is equivalent my laser above, and so is an Yludium Q37 Explosive Space
Modulator from the "Secret Tech of the RoM" supplement (which assumes a
different combat system), I can freely include both in my campaign using
either combat system, or any other which provides conversions between its
units and real-world units. 

> >SSDS and QSDS were made with FFS (with modifications), period.  It
> >sounds like if either of these systems had more plug-ins your
> >complaints wouldn't exist.  Given that a "secret" fixed FFS version
> >is the basis of the later, easy to use design systems, it makes
> >sense to print the damn thing so that others with the desire can
> >make more plug-ins.
> 
> God damn it, you seem to think that I'm just whining about the
> complexity level -- as though I had a nice safe user-friendly
> alternative. The FACT is that if I want to design a fighter craft
> (nothing esoteric, like battle armor or blimps or even combat choppers),
> or a dreadnaught, or anything over 5000 tons and not of TL10-12 that I
> am pretty much WITHOUT options. 

Yes, because fighters (being small) are a limiting case of the simpler
design systems, as are (for example) missiles and extremely low- or
high-tech craft.  QSDS constrains itself to a small range of hull sizes in
which a number of subsystems scale more or less linearly with size.
Designing a (good) 20-ton craft is *inherently* harder than designing a
(good) 500-ton craft, as you need to pay more attention to how you fit all
the needed subsystems into the far more constrained space...and you need
to think about what subsystems you can do without which get included
"silently" by QSDS (e.g., contragrav and g-comp).

QSDS is like Lego...if you want a more or less blocky shape, or a shape
which can be built up from blocks, it works really well, and is very easy
to use.  If you want (say) a smooth sphere, you're SOL.  FFS is like
modeling clay...you can get just about any shape you want, but actually
doing so takes time, patience, and skill.

> Look... for all my Irish temperament, I'm actually a pretty easy guy to
> satisfy. Just please in the name of God tell me how to build a cute
> widdle space fighter for T4 without a scientific calculator... then a
> 20,000 ton carrier to wrap around several squadrons of them... nothing
> esoteric, like hot-air balloons or Bussard ramjets....

You can't.  End of story.  If you want to do that, either learn FFS (it's
not *that* hard), or use pre-built designs (lots of those appear on the
TML, and in fact next month's THUDDD will be a heavy fighter specifically
to explore the new low-size domain opened by FFS2).  Or switch to another
game system which supports what you want to do, either as a patch on
Traveller, or using an entirely different game.  Nobody's holding a gun to
your head saying "Thou shalt not handwave figheters into existence, nor
shalt thou create 20,000 dt ore carriers our of whole cloth."  All FFS2
does for you is let you create both of these while remaining consistent
with the (game and real-world) properties of other vessels.

By the way, my brother Douglas mentioned that he uses FFS/SSDS despite
being a high-school dropout; conversely, all my THUDDD designs (including
my April THUDDD winner) have been QSDS designs, despite my having a
BS in chemistry with an engineering tilt.  So far, I've found the
"chunkiness" of QSDS doesn't overly constrain me, and I love that 25% cost
discount.  Your mileage may vary.  The point is, you have *many* more
(sanctioned) choices in this regard than in any other RPG in history, not
to mention your utter freedom to say "f*ck sanctioning" and roll your own
system or lack of same.

> >FFS2 was made from the ground up as what it was, the underlying
> >system for designing stuff.  Real units were used wherever possible
> >so that regardless of what combat system that gets used, they can
> >all convert from a set of units that doesn't end up being "hit
> >points" or some such crap.  There would have been a final stat
> >within a design sequence had the combat system (*any* combat system)
> >existed.
> 
> Oh. Ah. I see. It's all IG's fault for not keeping up with the authors,
> who continue to charge innovatively ahead and design ever-more complex,
> evermore incompatible design systems for a game that cannot make use of
> what they generate.

The authors of FFS2 produced an utterly admirable work.  They had to walk
a precarious balance beam between compatibilities with FFS1, the "secret"
FFS1.5, QSDS, SSDS, and canon.  I'm astonished how well they did at the
job; it was amusing to read the book and spot the dozens of places where
TML arguments clearly inspired new declarations on canon (e.g., now jump
involves *both* a lanthanum grid *and* H2 "displacement mass"!).

FFS2 was indeed seriously undercut by IG's approach to production.  Most
notable and pathetic are the ludicrously bad equation errors (parentheses
and double-headed arrows in place of multiplication signs, and so forth). 
These are simply not acceptable; they are clear indications that no
competent person at IG even *looked* at the galley proofs, an
unforgiveable sin in publishing.  My opinion of IG as a management team
has thus ratcheted down yet another notch, placing it currently near the
crust/mantle boundary. 

Less critical but still sad was their decision to rush the book into print
with (a) inadequate playtesting and (b) no game-unit conversions
specified.  The fact that (a) didn't end up causing any major problems
(that I've found, or that I've seen reported) must be ascribed to sheer
good fortune combined with the very talented group of authors.  As I've
mentioned, (b) isn't necessarily a major problem, but it's a shame IG
couldn't get their shit together on this issue before FFS2 came out.  It's
another (much less serious) instance of the M:0 vs. FS lack of
coordination syndrome.

> In brief, I should simply have taken up checkers for a year and a half,
> waited for FF&S2 to come out, then bum a spreadsheet for it off
> somebody. Groovy. NOW you tell me.

How you derived this from either your or others' comments is a mystery to
me.  Surely, you'd prefer QSDS (available in T4) to FFS2?  In a section I
snipped, you asked for conversions from QSDS stats to real-world units.
Other than the weapon and sensor systems, QSDS *works* in real-world
units.

> >(note that the T4 combat system was _supposed_ to look like HG, and so
> >QSDS was designed to produce numbers that would work in this
> >system---then we get the combat system that isn't in the same
> >ballpark *sigh*.
> 
> Understatement of the year.... but it still doesn't explain the
> incompatible-with-anything VDS.

One of our points of total agreement; VDS should never have been released
if FFS2 was planned.  At the very least, VDS should have been made largely
FFS1-compatible in the expectation that FFS2 would also be
FFS1-compatible.  What actually happened is another entry in my "IG
management is either stupid or seriously misguided" examples list.

> Nor the different language, stats, etc.
> between SSDS and QSDS. Nor a new FF&S that is slightly off-kilter with
> the old, which means that even if somebody had the out-of-print book to
> make their own plugins that they will now have to revamp EVERY FRIGGING
> THING THEY'VE BUILT to conform to the new standard.

FFS1 invalidated Traveller shipbuilding canon by moving all m-drives to
HEPlaR.  To compensate for the massive HEPlaR fuel requirements, they had
to reduce required J-Drive fuel.  This in turn broke FFS1 ship designs
with respect to *all* other releases of Traveller.  Personally, I'm glad
to see FFS2 (and QSDS/SSDS) returning to the older drive and fuel canon.

> ANY BOOK FOR DESIGNING HARDWARE THAT HAS NO SYSTEM FOR USING IT IS A
> WASTE OF TIME AND MONEY,

Oh, I agree!  And that's why physics is so handy. :)

> and only a techno-game-geek locked into their
> own private litle introverted universe could possibly fail to understand
> (and hence be offended by) this.

The claim "If you fail to agree with me, you are by definition stupid (or
misguided, or unenlightened, or being senselessly stubborn)" is a popular
rhetorical trick used by those whose actual arguments are not carrying the
audience.  I do not appreciate your use of it on this list.  Please
restrict your posts to arguments about Traveller, and refrain from ad
hominem attacks in the future.  This makes the list a more pleasant,
useful, and productive forum for all points of view.

> Nevermind the complexity level -- let's
> just set the whole issue of real-world complexity for real-world users
> off on the side for a minute. As is, FF&S2 is a $25 paperweight, because
> YOU CANNOT F*CKING USE WHAT YOU F*CKING BUILD. Why is that hard for
> people to grasp?

Perhaps because it's manifestly untrue?

> It would be -- not OK, but more palatable -- if there were alternatives.
> What is common fare in any SF game? Space fighters? Space fighters are
> cool. Robots? Hovertanks? Dreadnaughts? Powered battle armor? Okay;
> let's keep it simple; let's stop right there.We can't let everybody have
> everything they want. Let's confine ourselves to the basics.
> 
> Where are my stock dreadnaughts and space fighters and robots and
> things? Can I, after 1 year and $120, even HAVE these staples in my
> campaign unless I buy FF&S2 and whip them up myself out of whole cloth?

Dreadnoughts:  If you want to fight DN-class vessels versus one another
(or similarly large vessels), then yes, T4 has so far left you in the
lurch.  However, in 99% of role-playing-oriented Traveller campaigns,
knowing precisely how many thousands of point-defense lasers that Tigress
has is not an issue.  My brother once posted a scene from one of his games
that's stayed with me ever since...the players are in a 200-ton Free
Trader:

GM:  OK, the Imperial Battleship _Invincible_ is in orbit near you.  They
send a radio message, standard hailing band -- "Prepare to receive
boarders for a cargo inspection.  Acknowledge."

Player 1:  What are our odds of fighting this thing?

GM:  They've got weapon bays bigger than your entire ship.  *Lots* of
them.

Player 2:  OK, everyone, into uniform!  Send back, "Welcome aboard,
Imperial Navy!"

The point being that any ship much bigger than the 5,000-ton limit is,
relative to most player groups, an abstraction, a plot device, rather than
anything requiring detailed fleshing out.

Space fighters:  There still seems to be a massive difference of opinion
over whether these actually work in Traveller; if you want them, use the
several designs which have appeared on the TML, wait for a supplement to
include them, learn FFS2, or watch the September THUDDD.

Robots:  Admittedly not covered yet by Traveller.  Handwave them, use
older supplements (Book 8, Vampire Fleets) to build them, or wait and see
what comes from IG, the TML, or other sources.

> No. Do I have a rules set that tells me what happens when all the
> warbots and hovertanks and star cruisers all start shooting at each
> other? No.

T4 comes closer to this in many ways than any other SF RPG, especially now
that FFS2 is out (with its vehicle vs. starship armor and weapon
equivalencies).

> Can I design stuff using FF&S2 that will be compatible with
> the (old-FF&S-based) QSDS and SSDS-constructed ships (assuming I've
> found and downloaded the un-broken version of QSDS off the Net), as well
> as (virtually non-existant) stock ship & vehicle designs? No.

As QSDS and SSDS were based on a modified (unreleased) version of FFS1,
which I call FFS1.5, which fixed the jump fuel and thruster drive problems
from FFS1, and introduced Fusion+...frankly, any remaining tweaks required
to bring QSDS/SSDS/FFS2 into full compatibility should be very small
indeed.

> Perhaps it makes you happy to have your complex little design system
> with which you can fine-tune ships and vehicles and ordnance that sit
> there and look pretty and do nothing, but not me -- oh! I forgot! You've
> GOT the old TNE books! More importantly, you can UNDERSTAND them! You
> can USE what you build! What about the rest of the planet? What about
> people who haven't been playing Traveller since 1979? What about
> somebody who's just getting into the game for the first time who is
> getting good and mad because they have been given three design systems,
> the first of which is erroneous and the latter two of which contain gobs
> of material and statistics and whatnot that have no way of being used in
> the game?

There *are* good, simple ship combat systems available *now* for T4...RPSC
is the best, IMHO, but there are others floating around.

I think we all agree that the lack of a good *paper-published* ship combat
system is a Bad Thing, but I can't agree the situation is as horrible as
you make it out to be.

> Why would any normal person pay good money for this sort of whiplash
> every few months?

Were I IG, I would offer a full refund for any copy of Starships mailed to
them, and burn the returned copies.  It stinks that bad.  Other than that,
though, this whiplashing isn't that bad in my view.  Of course, I'm in the
software industry, which may bias my tolerance for updates, revisions, and
format changes every quarter or so. :)

> >It should have been FFS2 (even if unprinted first), then QSDS, along
> >with a combat system to use it (which should've been in beta when
> >FFS2 was being worked on).
> 
> Holy shit and tomato juice. You are seriously telling me that you come
> out with the high-complexity design system FIRST, then the SIMPLE
> version for all the kiddies, THEN the combat system to make use of what
> you build and all the stock designs that should have been included in
> the original release? (What good is an SF game without spaceships? or a
> rules set so they can shoot at each other)?

No, no, you utterly misunderstand the original poster.  He's talking about
order of *development*.  Release schedule is a separate issue.

> It is this sort of raging obliviousness to the real world that the $120
> I've spent on T4 supplements is hostage to. It is also an excellent
> example of how badly IG screwed up when they placed the writing and
> editing of the game system in the hands of a select few gearheads on
> this digest....

What, you'd prefer your ship-design systems to be written by poets?  I
mean, seriously, who else *can* do this kind of work?

Now, for the QSDS end of the spectrum, they should have engaged far more
inexperienced playtesters to see if they could *use* the resulting system,
and used the results of these tests to fine-tune its design and
presentation.  Yet another IG management screw-up, but one of the less
disruptive ones, IMHO -- QSDS (the bug-fixed 1.5 version) is a good,
simple, straightforward ship design system.

> each of whom enforces their own biases in every book
> they write.... farming game design and writing out to the fan-gurus must
> have looked like such a shrewd and cost-saving measure two years ago;
> kind of like putting the Mormons and the Ba'hai and the Messianic Jews
> together and telling them to write the definitive treatise on
> monotheism.

I'm not following your analogy.  Are you suggesting that using just one
of these groups would be better, or including more groups, or just one
group not on this list?  I truly don't follow what you're trying to say
here.

> By commitee. For free. Like the outcome isn't as predictable
> as a Klan rally in East L.A.

Showing how little you know about LA racial politics, but whatever. :)

> Even if the math were correct, which it isn't in the only published
> version, QSDS doesn't agree with SSDS on a whole host of matters (how
> are docking rings and external grapples different? why figure mass for
> SSDS and not QSDS? do sandcasters need to be put in batteries or not?
> with MFD's or not?

All answered by FFS2, which answers apply (by definition) to QSDS.  On the
"why figure mass" issue, it's a *simplification* -- what you're asking
for, right?  Figuring mass allows you to see if the ship's density falls
outside the range where calculating m-drive performance based on volume
breaks down, and you need to instead fall back on the more complicated
iterative f=ma approach.

> what are microseconds?

Oh, *please*.  If you don't either know this or know how to use any
reference to find out, you de facto are incapable of Traveller ship
design.  Or any other even vaguely engineering-related task, in all
likelihood.

> how do you control 5 missiles
> with an MFD that only controls 3?

You don't.  Or you rotate control, guiding those near targets, letting the
others coast...a useful tactic, by the way.

> and what dumb shit would design a
> warship that couldn't control its own weapons anyway?).

My opponent's equivalent of Lockheed, with any luck. :)

> Between stock starship designs that are simply made up and cannot be
> built with anything, and the above design issues, and the fact that the
> NEW master design system is apparently a little-bit incompatible with
> the old out-of-print semi-comprehensible one... I don't know whether to
> laugh or cry. I simply cannot believe that people are happily defending
> this. I feel like I'm trying to describe color to a blind man. The more
> I point out that things are non-functional, the more people insist that
> it is (1) actually okay and will all be resolved in the next book, or
> (2) IG's fault. 

(1) No, we're arguing that it's resolved already, though perhaps not
    as cleanly or completely as we might like.

(2) The problems that exist *are* IG's fault, mostly.  So?

> Oh well. Maybe somebody will take pity on this poor sinner and design an
> Excel spreadsheet to design capital fire-&-forget missiles, along with
> stats for the launcher and a column for conversion to QSDS stats... a
> VLS that shoots Sidewinders the size of a telephone pole.... and then a
> nice 20-ton fighter that can carry a pair on external racks...

You should see about a dozen of the latter in the September THUDDD, if we
get the usual number of entries.

> Until then, I STILL quit. This broken, self-contradicting, Swiss-cheese
> excuse for an overpriced puke-ola game system will claim not one jot
> more of my time or money.

I commend your resolve to not send good money (and time) after bad.  It is
abundantly clear that T4 is not working *for you*.  I merely state that
yours is not the only view of the world.

> This whole f*ckaround has reached such heights
> of baroque unreality that it defies description. Not only is the Emperor
> naked, but he's dead

Naked???  Gods, that little detail got past me back in the Rebellion era.
No wonder the Imperial Guard were distracted enough to let Dulinor paste
him... :)

> -- and instead of trying to revive the sonofabitch,
> or anoint a worthy successor (T5?), the game-nerds are dutifully
> genuflecting to the decomposing corpse.

I will give you this, Jay...you have *quite* a way with metaphors!

- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
   |   Craig Berry - cberry@cinenet.net
 --*--    Home Page: http://www.cinenet.net/users/cberry/home.html
   |      Member of The HTML Writers Guild: http://www.hwg.org/   
       "Every man and every woman is a star."

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1722
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, August 20 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1723



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Trader skill vs Broker skill
Marc, Somebody, Help!  With T4 starship computers
Re: Question for Marc & a second question
Re: zero-G beds (my vote:no)
Re: Task Resolution
Porrozlo
Re: UNanswered
Chemistry Skill
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1715
Re: Brokers
Re: Event Horizon
Re: RoM/Terran TL
Re: RoM/Terran TL
Re: RoM/Terran TL
Yet another of the MULTITUDE of Requests to Marc

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

Date: 21 Aug 1997 00:26:31 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: Trader skill vs Broker skill

>Maybe, maybe not.  Rob Prior has a good system on his website for
>developing Trade Tables that you might want to look at, it includes tasks. 

Glad you liked it, Eris. 
<<http://www.interlog.com/~dmci104/GamingClub/Traveller/trade.html>> is the
URL.


I've always seen Broker as a skill in bargaining, while Trade is a skill in
marketing.  That is, a broker can get you the best price on grapple grommets,
and sell them for you as well, but a trader will be able to predict whether
grapple grommets are really in demend on Regina or not.

In terms of starship crew functions, the trader will know what kind of cargo
buy, while the broker handles the actual buying and selling. (Of course, a
single person could have both skills.)

On my web page (URL above) I have a set of tasks for finding, buying, and
selling trade goods.  About the only change you would have to make to convert
from MT to T4 would be to multiply the times by ten.  (MT tasks multiplied a
3D roll by the time given, thus the time given is about 10% of the actual
time taken.)

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 19:38:11 +0000
From: Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com>
Subject: Marc, Somebody, Help!  With T4 starship computers

I didn't see this post on the TML (which I sent last night), so I
writing another one about the same topic.

My question is this.  How many computer programs can be run in a
starship computer at one time?

Before, in CT, computers had space and capacity figures telling you how
much space a computer had to run programs and how many total programs
the computer can hold.

For example, a model/1 computer could run 2 size one programs
simultaneously, or it could run 1 size two program.

I don't know how to handle this in T4.  Book 1 says that a program must
be of the appropriate TL to run, but it doen't state how many programs
you can run at one time.

Am I to believe that you can run as many programs as you want--all at
the same time, as long as the TL requirement is met?

Kenneth.

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 02:00:06 +0000 ()
From: kraehe@bakunin.hb.north.de (Michael Koehne)
Subject: Re: Question for Marc & a second question

Moin Marc,

> That option has been eliminated. It is too prone to abuse. If a player wa=
> nts
> an FFFFFF character the the game master will allow it, then OK. Otherwise.

> 	Traditional Rolls.

	we have done several T4.0 characters this way most where
	fine. Offer a line stating that its usual to throw a character
	away whos sum of characteristic is less than m3 of a standart
	turret ;-)

> 	Pre-Rolled Sequence. Before the character generation procedure is started,
> the player rolls the dice quite a few times and records the results in or der.
> The player should roll the half die at least 20 times, a single die at least
> 40 times, and two dice at least 50 times.

	rolling 50 dice offers abuse by e.g use the high ones for
	the characteristics while using the low one to boost them.

	its imho a bad idea to pre roll more dice, than you probately
	use. e.g. 50 * 2d6 means pick the ABC-rolls for charateristics,
	and 6+ for the 6-8 rolls for 2 terms, and you have an hero.

	Using distinct 12d6 pools for characteristics and skills, limits
	abuse. I'll try to come up with a clear text RSN.

By Michel
- -- 
	kraehe@bakunin.north.de		human.is-bremen.de/~kraehe/traveller
		  " ceterum censeo MSDOS esse delendam "

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 97 19:51:43 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: zero-G beds (my vote:no)

On 08/20/97 at 09:51 AM,  Glenn Hoppe <starcity@sk.sympatico.ca> said:

>I agree completely. My SleepWell(tm) Narcoplast sleeping surface is
>designed to work under the 1G standard gravity of the starship. It folds
>down from the wall, like beds in those small cheezy apartments in the
>movies, sans noisy box-spring.

I do it with the bed as an easychair/sofa/futon/bed type of thing.  It
pulls out from the wall and unfolds when you transform it from a sofa
(large) or easychair (small).  Frankly, passengers spend most of their time
in the commons areas rather than their rooms.  The cabins are *small* and
crowded, and the staterooms (small and large) aren't much better. 
Passengers lounge in the Lounge, they read in the Reading Room, they dine
in the Dining Room, they entertain in the Entertainment Room..on small
ships it's all the same room ;->, but it gets them out of their cramped
little cabins.  Game reason, it forces them into more interaction with the
other inmates..uh I mean, passengers ;->..and crew than if they can hole up
in their cabins.

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

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 97 20:07:49 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

On 08/16/97 at 08:07 PM,  "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
said:

>4.  Skills should be kept in the same range as CT (i.e. 1-6, or  so--where
>a level 3 is considered a professional skill level, level  1 is considered
>a beginner, and level 5 or higher is considered a  beginner).

I suspect you meant, "and level 5 or higher is considered an expert.",
correct?

>5.  The task statement should be modified so that skills and stats  are
>equally represented.

I do think it would be *good* if skills and stats ran on appromimately the
same scale. This implies that with an average Characteristic of 7, an
average skill should also be *about* 7.  If this becomes the case, I would
*prefer* that the skills achieved these levels without using a multiplier
(ie KB2), might or might not be possible, but I would prefer it, and what
this means for skills is that 1 is a beginner, perhaps 6 is professional,
and 9 is an expert.

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

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 21:15:02 -0400
From: Daniel Poulin <pould@netcom.ca>
Subject: Porrozlo

Would anyone know where there would be a map of the planet Porrozlo
(neighbour of Rhylanor in the Spinward Marches)?

Daniel Poulin
pould@netcom.ca

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 00:56:28 -0400
From: Eric Freitas <edf@atlantic.net>
Subject: Re: UNanswered

>I think that somewhere along the lines someone got their acronyms crossed,
>as whatever UN organization is supposed to have developed jump drive had
>"Space" as part of the name, and isn't supposed to exist for at least 20
>more years!


Uh, UNSPACEY ?   Macross? Uh, 50ft humans from outer space...  I don't 
think so.

:)'

Eric Freitas
edf@atlantic.net

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 21:00:44 -0700
From: David Smart <dsmart@flash.net>
Subject: Chemistry Skill

In case anyone is wondering what the Chemistry skill would be good
for other than making gun powder, I've pulled the following off
of NASA's site for the MIR. Not being a science type, I thought it
was pretty interesting...

"How the Mir's "Oxygen Candles" Work 

When the Mir's two Elektron oxygen-producing systems are
unavailable, the crew burns "Oxygen Candles" to produce the
oxygen they need. Following is a brief explanation of how
these candles work. This technology is well understood,
highly reliable and at least as old as WW1 submarines,
where it was already used. 

The "candles" are stainless-steel cassettes holding
"briquets" (as the Russians call it) of the chemical
Lithium Perchlorate, LiClO4, or sometimes Magnesium
Biperchlorate, Mg(ClO4)2. 

Twenty cassettes are inside a generator container which has
an 8.5-watt fan (ventilator), a dust collector, and a filter.
When heated with a small amount of solid fuel, the chemical
decomposes into Lithium (or Magnesium) Chlorate plus Oxygen.
The oxygen admixes to the air being blown through the generator
by the fan. Each cassette generates 600 liters of oxygen (i.e.,
about what one person needs for a day), and it takes a cassette
about five to twenty minutes to decompose."

So remember...when your life support has been shot to pieces,
"'Tis better to light a candle then to curse the darkness".

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 21:53:48 -0400
From: "Michael D. Peters" <Letterworks@Comten.com>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1715

Traveller-digest wrote:

> Date: Tue, 19 Aug 97 18:18 BST-1
> From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
> Subject: Re: Jump Drives
>
> In-Reply-To: <199708151347.IAA23690@brain.ames.net>
>
> Andrew,
>
> > On the list, some people came up with the rather cool (I thought)
> "Hydrogen
> > Bubble" theory about jump fuel - but if you consider Annic Nova
> canon, it
> > appears that this cannot be the case.
>
> ISTR Annic Nova was declared non-canon several years ago.
> ______________________________________________________________________
>
> Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
>
>  "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"
>
> ------------------------------
>

What!!!!! Something that was published by GDW from the CT days, not only
in the FIRST (IIRC) JoTAS, but was republished as a Double Adventure,
declared NON-CANON!!!! Where's my lash I feel the need for a long bout
of self-flagulation... maybe a turn or two on the Wheel!!!  Say it ain't
so, Joe!!!  ;^> (G).

Mike Peters

(Couldn't resist, but seriously I had realized that the Annic Nova was
"cast down". There goes that TL 19 Pocket Empire I had, left over from
the ROM period but untouched by the Long Night, and hiding along the
RIM, scenario I had all ready to send to IG (sigh) ;^).

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 22:06:06 -0400 (EDT)
From: pawn@CAM.ORG (Glenn Grant)
Subject: Re: Brokers

Marc, you said:

>Brokers can influence consultations of the Actual Value Table, but must be
>paid a commission. Brokers, however, vary in quality and availability by
>starport.
>
>Broker  Starport        Mod     Comm
>Broker-4        A       +4      20%
>Broker-3        AB      +3      15%
>Broker-2        ABC     +2      10%
>Broker-1        ABCD    +1        5%

Problem: If skill levels are supposed to range from 0 to 15 in T4.1 (to put
them on par with stats), then a professional level in a skill ought to be
6+. There would be almost no professionals with Broker-1.

Consider: you go to Merchant Academy for four years, graduating with, say,
Broker-2 and Trader-2. You enlist in the Merchants, automatically getting
another Broker (Business). Let's say you serve three terms, getting a
commission and two promotions, thus you get about fifteen more skill rolls.
If you concentrate a lot of rolls on the Career and Social tables (but not
exclusively), you could get about four more levels of Broker. At rank 02
you automatically get another Broker (Business).

Thus, by age 34 you've got Broker-8. Now _that's_ a professional level of
skill. Anybody with Broker-1 is just dabbling.

If you totally geek out and take only Broker at the academy, and roll on
the Career and Social tables at every opportunity, you can easily end up
with Broker-13 or more. After only three terms of service. Imagine an
eight-term Senior Captain who retires to run a brokerage house; he'll have
Broker-15 or whatever is the maximum allowed.

While we're on the topic, *is* there a maximum skill level in T4.1? The
draft I've got doesn't mention one.

The point is that your Broker table, above, looks like a holdover from the
CT/MT era. If *specialization* skill levels are going to be so much higher
in T4, such rules are going to have to be radically rethought. This applies
to every similar rule in every supplement and rule book. A lot of old rules
aren't going to work any more.

Best,

 + GMG +

    -----------------------Glenn Grant-----------------------  
                         <pawn@cam.org>
    Web: <http://helios.physics.utoronto.ca:8080/ggrant.html>
"Nature abhors normality. It can't go too long without a mutant."
                        --Dr Blockhead

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 19:09:21 +0800
From: kenji@accessone.com (Kenji Schwarz)
Subject: Re: Event Horizon

James Lindsay wrote:

>Everyone knows that making a horror movie is a gamble.  The same goes
>for science fiction.  Everyone is afraid to dump money in such a
>product because the viewing audience is generally narrower than for a
>movie that is a bit closer to home (unless it is pure "eye candy" like
>ID4).
>
>Combining the two genres was a very brave attempt indeed.  It is too
>bad that they couldn't get decent writers for the movie.  When a movie
>like "Event Horizon" gets bad reviews-- and it *is* getting bad
>reviews-- it just makes it that much harder for the next guy that
>comes along that wants to make a SF, horror, or SF/horror movie.

True enough.  It makes me feel a bit guilty slamming it; but on the other
hand... well...  anyway.  There *were* a number of good touches in it, I
thought.  Ambiguity about whether the ship's builder may have been "in
cahoots" with the Badness from the start, for example.  Having
African-American characters who weren't mere two-dimensional cutouts, but
full-fledged three-dee stock figures was quite a step forward, too.  It
made a better horror film than a sci-fi film, I thought.  The tech was just
window-dressing.  The problematic grav drive could just as easily have been
your standard "dusty tome of forbidden knowledge."  _Terminator_ or _The
Reflecting Skin_ is more "science/horror" to my mind.


>Why does the pilot continue to move the Lewis and Clark forward
>(blind) inside Neptune's atmosphere when ranging information clearly
>puts them on a collision course with the Event Horizon?  Lucky thing
>they used reverse thrust when they did, eh?

I've met a couple of ambulance drivers, who probably aren't representative
of the field, but knowing them did leave me unsurprised at this move.

>Why does the "gravity drive room" have big spikey bits that could
>easily impale you, yet nobody actually gets impaled?  These writers
>gotta learn to work with the props department.

Actually, I liked that -- they were at least trying to mess with *some* of
our preconceptions about the genre.  I just wish they hadn't messed with
our preconceptions about acceleration, for example.

>Neptune's atmosphere).  The "Event Horizon" should have been in orbit
>around Uranus... at least we would have had some butt-hole jokes.

I KNEW there was something missing...

>Search & Rescue in the year 2047?  Exactly how many civilian or
>commercial space vessels are flying around out there 50 years from
>now?  Why is a "search & rescue" ship named after a team of
>*explorers*?

Oh!  Silly me... I thought it was named after that sitcom.  You know, Lois
& Clark?   Superhero flying off to rescue the damsel in distress?

>When the first crew goes mad, why do they all pose for the bridge
>cameras while performing their various atrocities?

Because they're professionals, damn it!

(Look, ma, no eyes!)

>Why was there a 30-second audible countdown to begin depressurization
>inside the airlock if there was no way of overriding it?  Pretty
>annoying (kind of like Chrysler's "your door is ajar"-- taken to the
>extreme).

Let's be fair: *was* an experimental vessel, after all.  There were some
kinks in it.

>With all the ship's power available during the movie ("gravity drive",
>artificial gravity, 30G ion drives) why can't somebody rig up a few
>more lights so that everything isn't so damn dark (especially in
>sickbay)?  How the hell do you perform maintenance or repairs with a 1
>Watt light bulb?

Yes; as someone else pointed out, the *outside* of the ship was lit up like
a Christmas tree.

>Why does a mile-long ship-- "with 15 foot high ceilings"-- suffer
>toxic CO2 levels after being inhabited by a crew of eight after only a
>few hours?

Umm... rapid decomposition of bovine biological byproducts?

>Exactly how much air (ie: reaction mass) can exist inside a vacc suit
>to bring "Mr. Jet-Propelled_Wonder" back after being blasted away from
>an exploding vessel?  Why would you design a vacc suit with this kind
>of feature anyways?

I suspect Hengabar Spofulam has a team working on that question as we speak...

Kenji Schwarz
kenji@accessone.com

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 20:19:35 -0600
From: lguatney@carbon.cudenver.edu (Leroy William Lu Guatney)
Subject: Re: RoM/Terran TL

On Wed, 20 Aug 1997 14:00:26 -0700
bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh) writes:
>
>>Now if you are telling me that a bunch of Terrans at TL14 can take on the
>>Third Imperium at one entire tech level disadvantage--well let's just say
>>that is like the Terrans in their 4900 ton ships taking on 74,900 ton Vilani
>>ships. (In fact, I would venture a guess that the Vilani would need only
>>one ship!)  Remember, I just reread the entire Invasion: Earth game, so this
>>is not IIRC going on here.
>
>The Zhodani (mostly TL14) did fine against the Imperium (mostly TL15)
>through the 4th and 5th Rim Wars...TL15 vs 14 isn't that big a technology
>advantage; Jump-6 helps very little (you can never design a decent warship
>to take advantage of it), armour and lasers don't improve, the only big
>advantage is smaller power plants. The Solomani Sphere had lots of high-pop
>worlds, which are the only ones that count economically - no surprise they
>did reasonably well (but one should note, still lost lots of 
>territory...)


I think you meant Frontier wars, not "4th and 5th Rim Wars."

While I agree that FFW was a fun game, and were it fought with HIGH
GUARD rules the Zhodani would have gotten a pasting (for some of the
reasons posted here recently about HG).  I also recognize, that of _all_
the boardgames published for Traveller, FFW (due to it's immediate
proximity in the house campaign) needed to be a little closer to keep
us all on on our feet.

I agree about the value of J-6.  Also, even in 1110, the Imperium staple
was J-4 ships (see Fighting Ships, CT S9, and Spinward Marches Campaign).
Another reason AHLs might be of value for their unusually longer legs.

See Hans' post about Steve Higginbotham's analysis of HIGH GUARD at the
TL 14/15.  I did the same analysis and it is a 3:1 advantage, which is
significant.

We don't have sector stats on a third of the Solomani Sphere.  The only
in the remaining two thirds of the Sphere that portrays your view of the
Sphere is the Solomani Rim, witness Diaspora, Daibei, Old Expanses,
Magyar, and Alpha Crucis (some say Alpha Leonis).

Just for averages, assume that the entire nine sectors of the Sphere
are twice as populous as the average Third Imperial sector (which the
sector data do not bear out).  That makes the Sphere about equal in
population, hence production, as the Third Imperium.

Then, the Imperium _still_ has a 3:1 advantage over the Solomani, and
I:E states that the Imperium was _prepared_ for the conflict having
reinforced the border.

Yes, the Solomani managed to puncture the front lines, but it was by no
means a breakthrough.  This is where I contend that those brave TL15
marines bought it.


>>Sorry, but it is clear to me, that Terra was TL15+ at the outset of the
>>Solomani Rim War, c. 998.
>
>Not clear to *anyone* else - there's no evidence beyond your own wishful
>thinking.


Well now, I wouldn't spend so much time on it if everyone agreed with me,
now would I. <G>  It is not wishful.  The only wishful was that more thought
was put into publishing the background of this game, especially since it
is so important to people.  That is by no means a flame, but it is also
clear to me that part of the problem we "laymen" have in interpreting this
stuff is to sort all of that out.  Novels are written by one, maybe two
authors, occasionally three.  Traveller has _never_ been that way.


>Bruce
>


Leroy Guatney - lwlg@usa.net
 University of Mars, NorthAm Campus
 Class of '98

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 20:14:26 -0600
From: lguatney@carbon.cudenver.edu (Leroy William Lu Guatney)
Subject: Re: RoM/Terran TL

On Wed, 20 Aug 1997 21:18:33 +0200 (METDST)
Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk> writes:
>
>Leroy Guatney writes:
>>Using the same MT source that says RoM was only TL12, the Imperium was TL15
>>at this time.  
>
>The Imperium reached TL 15 around Year 1000. That means they began upgrading
>their navy to TL 15 around that time. Some of their navy, that is, because
>only a few Imperial planets would be able to build TL 15 ships from the
>start (In 1100 they still have some TL 14 ships).


Are you saying that this TL15 threshold happened all at once?  Suddenly,
we wake up and the headlines read "Imperium now able to build TL15", so
start construction.  I don't think so.


>So the Solomani Border
>War would be fought with mostly TL 14 ships. As for TL 15 troops, who knows?
>If we use the explanation I came up with (that an interstellar society's TL
>is measured by it's highest space technology, whereas individual planets'
>are measured by that planet's highest overall TL) then both the Imperium
>and the Solomani may have had some TL 15 troops. But if Terra's home
>defense units had a TL of 14 then that is solid evidence  -  I'd go so
>far as to call it proof  -  that Terra's military TL at that time was 14.


That is one way to look at it, and mine was another.  I am trying to have
a discussion of "future canon".  I am looking at Traveller background holes
(fill more holes, fill more holes, fill more holes, fill more holes)
and trying to see what the potential is, where the general (though not
unanimous) response has been "There's no hole here."  I just have to
disagree.


>>Remember also, that Terra (and the Solomani Sphere) were part
>>of the Imperium up until the Solomani Confederation was founded in 871.
>
>Right. And since the Imperium reached TL 14 around 700 then it makes sense
>that some planets in the Solomani Sphere was TL 14 too. And the evidence
>works both ways, of course; if Terra had been TL 15 before 871 then TL 15
>knowledge would have been available to the Imperial authorities and at
>least some Imperial planets would have been TL 15 too.


Well, we know how many TL16 worlds there are in the Third Imperium c.1120,
and nobody is calling it a TL16 Third Imperium.  That leaves a lot of room
for my interpretation. (Yes, and there were a few sectors not visited by
the Digest Group, but that changes nothing on this point.)


>>Now if you are telling me that a bunch of Terrans at TL14 can take on the
>>Third Imperium at one entire tech level disadvantage--well let's just say
>>that is like the Terrans in their 4900 ton ships taking on 74,900 ton Vilani
>>ships. 
>
>That's not true, at least not by CT combat rules. Steve Higginbotham once
>estimated that given optimal ship design (not always a given ;-), TL 12
>ships have a 12/1 advantage over TL 9 ships while TL 15 ships have a 3/1
>advantage over TL 14 ships (I have no idea how things are under T4 ship
>design and combat rules).


Then Steve is in perfect agreement with me.  I did the TL14/15 analysis
a long time ago and I can confirm the 3/1 advantage.  It all comes down
to powerplant size as the difference between the two levels.

I have not done the 12 to 9 numbers, and that size range gets complicated
there because the numbers I stated above are _MAXIMUM_ sizes for the
purported TL9 Terrans and TL11 Vilani.  This is using CT High Guard rules.

So what did I miss in your statement?  It seems that we agree.


>Nor is 'a bunch of Terrans' the proper appelation

Correct.

Forget I said "a bunch of Terrans", because I was not trying to imply
anything by it.


>for the combined forces of the whole Solomani Sphere. And in any case, the
>Imperial forces would not be solid TL 15... or even borderline TL 15.


Same with Solomani forces.  The game's counter mix bear that out.  That
just reinforces my point.  If there were few TL15 ground troops on both
sides, they could have been eliminated much earlier in the war.


>Let me get this straight: You claim that Terra was TL 15+, despite the fact
>that Terra's defenses were only TL 14? 


Well, see above.


>I've got a suggestion: Pretend you have to present the best possible case for 
>the RoM being TL 12 and examine every bit of evidence in that light. List it 
>in two columns side by side with the 'RoM was TL 15+' case and see for
>yourself. Perhaps that will help.
>
>      Hans Rancke


Hans, that is _exactly_ what I have been doing.  As a review, because I know
how hard it is to keep up with the TML, even on digests.

                         RoM TL12                                RoM TL15+
                         --------                                ---------
Robotics                    x                                       x
Terraforming                -                                       x
JumpTech                    x                                       -
post-RoM Terra Tech Level   -                                       x
miscellaneous               -                                       x


As my previous post says, I can see it going either way, but there is just
more ideas that convince me it is a higher value than not.  Yes, then I
shift into a mode of assume the hypothesis is and test for True/False, which
is what I have been doing, along with examining (under a microscope) the
rules for support either way.  I think the support is there.

While boardgames are certainly a source of insight, the core rules (BB 1-8)
are more telling.


Leroy Guatney - lwlg@usa.net
 University of Mars, NorthAm Campus
 Class of '98

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 20:26:22 -0600
From: lguatney@carbon.cudenver.edu (Leroy William Lu Guatney)
Subject: Re: RoM/Terran TL

On Wed, 20 Aug 1997 13:55:45 -0700
bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh) writes:
>
>>I only focused on the Inv: Earth game, since that is the only post-RoM
>>published source of Terra's TL until 1107/1110.  I:E reinforces the
>>quote of 1107 Terra's TL being 15, which is about as far as they wanted
>>to get specific on the subject.
>
>I:E certainly doesn't reinforce the idea that Terra was TL-15 at the time
>of the invasion.


That is not the reinforcing I was speaking of.  I was saying that I:E
does not reinforce any TL for Terra, until 1107.


>I'll grant that the Imperium was (early) TL-15 if that's what MT says
>(anyone else check the dates?), but it must be pretty early; I say again that
>the invasion of Earth was the single most important ground battle for the
>Imperium to win, and if they had TL-15 troops they would have deployed them.


And that is why I say that the few that would have been deployed quite
probably would have been shot up after a decade of war.  The stand at Earth
is the _last_ thing of the War.


>>None whatsoever.  [all solomani worlds in the Rim in 1107] were all TL14 max.
>>One world over the border in
>>Aldebaran sector, adjacent to the Near Bootes cluster was TL15.  That was
>>in GDW's newsletter "Imperial Lines" #2.
>
>So, in order to assume a TL-15 terra in the Rim War, you have to assume that
>it was the *only* world in the Solomani Sphere that was TL-15 - which seems
>odd. 


Odd because that is not the case.  The GDW source says that TL15 worlds are
rare, but the frontier along the Third Imperium at a mere TL14 is reasonable
since the _unmoveable center_ is around Earth, in the former worlds of the
OEU (and Yes, their TL could be due to the Imperium having advanced them,
but could also have been because they were all along.)


>This seems somewhat implausible to me. The preponderance of evidence really
>does suggest that Terra was TL-14 at the time of the invasion.


I think I said that earlier if you rely merely upon CT sources, which is
what this has been about (mostly recently).  Since CT made the Sphere +1,
a consistent canon says treat I:E at +1 TL, which as has been shown here
does fit.  (Hmmm, maybe I was too hard on the "incompatibilty" notion.)


>Bruce
>


Leroy Guatney - lwlg@usa.net
 University of Mars, NorthAm Campus
 Class of '98

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 23:07:15 -0400
From: "Michael D. Peters" <Letterworks@Comten.com>
Subject: Yet another of the MULTITUDE of Requests to Marc

Marc Miller  wrote:

(snip)

> That, of course, is the challenge... as I approach the combat rules. My
> intention (not having yet reviewed the combat rules in depth as yet) is to
> rewrite combat as a task based activity which differentiates between the
> various skills.
>
> Marc

Marc,

When you begin reviewing the combat rules please give consideration to
revamping them into a square grid format (say, something similar to
MAYDAY or Azhanti high Lightning's systems). I realize that you are
attempting to keep the basic rules simple but I don't believe that a
change like this would add all that much complexity and will make it
much easier fro those of us that LIKE miniature combat. This was one of
the major complaints I've had since T1 (CT) came out in the 70's, that
is until the above named suppliments (games) came out. Thanks for any
consideration you give to this suggestion.

Mike Peters

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1723
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Thursday, August 21 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1724



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Trav Summer Sale
Re: Brokers
Re: Trader skill vs Broker skill
Re: Early Charges?
Re: RoM/Terra TL
Re: UNanswered
Re: Early Charges?
Silly question
Re: zero-G beds (my vote:no)
RE: Early Charges?
Re: Brokers
Re: Relativism in Traveller
Re: Humans and Zero-G (was: Sex in zero-G)

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 22:24:19 -0500
From: Sam Thomas <sinbad@dfw.net>
Subject: Trav Summer Sale

Hey I am forwarding this for those looking to fill out thier Traveller
collection

>From: "Roger Sanger" <rs@cyberspace.com>
>To: rs@cyberspace.com
>Reply-To: rs@cyberspace.com
>Organization: Game Source
>Subject: Trav Summer Sale
>X-Actually-From: "Roger Sanger" <rodge@case.cyberspace.com>
>Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 18:56:44 -0700
>
>
>                       TRAVELLER SUMMER SALE!
>                       ----------------------
>
>Don't give in to the school-is-approaching blues. Treat yourself
>to some excellent deals on your favorite game system. Forget your
>troubles and role-play away!
>
>Enjoy...
>
>-------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Classic Traveller Boxed Set (Books 1, 2, 3)             . C GDW $18
>Book 1 - Characters and Combat                          . C GDW $ 8
>Book 2 - Starships                                      . C GDW $ 8
>Book 3 - Worlds and Adventures                          . C GDW $ 8
>Book 4 -- Mercenary  (CT Merc char. gen., weapon tech)    C GDW $ 8
>Book 5 -- High Gaurd (CT Ship Design and Navy char. gen.) C GDW $ 8
>Book 6 - Scouts                                           C GDW $ 8
>Supplement 01 -- 1001 Characters                          C GDW $ 5
>Supplement 02 -- Animal Encounters                        C GDW $ 5
>Supplement 03 -- The Spinward Marches                     C GDW $ 8
>Supplement 04 -- Citizens of the Imperium                 C GDW $ 8
>Supplement 06 -- 76 Patrons                               C GDW $ 8
>Supplement 07 -- Traders and Gunboats                     C GDW $10
>Supplement 08 -- Library Data A-M                         C GDW $ 8
>Supplement 09 -- Fighting Ships                           C GDW $12
>Supplement 11 -- Library Data N-Z                         C GDW $ 8
>Alien Module 1 -- Aslan                                   C GDW $15
>Alien Module 2 -- K'kree                                  C GDW $20
>Solomani                                                . C GDW $15
>Darrians                                                . C GDW $15
>Adventure  1 - The Kinunir                                C GDW $10
>Adventure  2 - Research Station Gamma                     C GDW $10
>Adventure  4 - Laviathan                                  C GDW $10
>Adventure  7 - Broadsword                                 C GDW $10
>Adventure  9 - Nomads of the World-Ocean                  C GDW $10
>Adventure 10 - Safari Ship                                C GDW $10
>Adventure 11 - Murder on Arcturus Station                 C GDW $10
>Adventure 12 - Secret of the Ancients                   . C GDW $12
>Adventure 13 - Signal GK (prelude to the Virus)         . C GDW $12
>Double Adventure 1 -- Annic Nova / Shadows                C GDW $10
>Double Adventure 2 -- Mission on Mithril/Bright Face      C GDW $10
>Double Adventure 3 -- Death Station / The Argon Gambit    C GDW $10
>Double Adventure 4 -- Marooned / Marooned Alone           C GDW $10
>Double Adventure 5 - Chamax Plague / Horde              . C GDW $10
>Double Adventure 6 -- Conquest / Intervention             C GDW $10
>MegaTraveller Rebellion Sourcebook                        M GDW $12
>Best of the Journal 1                                     C GDW $ 8
>JTAS #06                                                  C GDW $ 8
>JTAS #11                                                  C GDW $ 8
>JTAS #12                                                  C GDW $ 8
>JTAS #13                                                  C GDW $ 8
>JTAS #14                                                  C GDW $ 8
>JTAS #15                                                  C GDW $ 8
>JTAS #16                                                  C GDW $ 8
>JTAS #17                                                  C GDW $ 8
>JTAS #18                                                  C GDW $ 8
>JTAS #19                                                  C GDW $ 8
>JTAS #20                                                  C GDW $ 8
>JTAS #21                                                  C GDW $ 8
>JTAS #23                                                  C GDW $ 8
>JTAS #24                                                  C GDW $ 8
>Challenge #25                                             % GDW $10
>Challenge #26                                             % GDW $10
>Challenge #28                                             % GDW $ 4
>Challenge #29                                             % GDW $ 4
>Challenge #34                                             % GDW $ 4
>Challenge #35                                             % GDW $ 4
>Challenge #37                                             % GDW $ 4
>Challenge #41                                             % GDW $ 4
>Challenge #44                                             % GDW $ 4
>Challenge #45                                             % GDW $ 4
>Challenge #46                                             % GDW $ 4
>Challenge #52                                             % GDW $ 4
>Challenge #53                                             % GDW $ 4
>Challenge #57                                             % GDW $ 4
>Challenge #69                                             % GDW $ 4
>Challenge #71                                             % GDW $ 4
>Challenge #73                                             % GDW $ 4
>Challenge #74                                             % GDW $ 4
>Challenge #75                                             % GDW $ 4
>Adventure Class Ships Volume 1 (complete)                C fasa $20
>Fifty Starbases                                   Judges Guild  $20
>Amycus Probe                                     C Judges Guild $12
>Darthanon Queen   (CT adventure)                 C Judges Guild $ 8
>Tancred           (CT adventure)                 C Judges Guild $ 8
>Traveller's Digest #19                                     DGP  $10
>Traveller's Digest #20                                     DGP  $10
>Traveller's Digest #21                                     DGP  $10
>Megatraveller Journal #3 (Deneb)                         M DGP  $15
>Megatraveller Journal #4 (Lords of Thunder Campaign)      M DGP $20
>Snapshot                                                  C GDW $10
>Spinward Marches Campaign - (set in Fifth Frontier War)   C GDW $20
>Hard Times                                              . M GDW $18
>Knightfall   (Massilia Sector Campaign Sourcebook - DGP). M GDW $18
>Flaming Eye Campaign Sourcebook (rare)                  . M DGP $30
>TNE - Traveller - The New Era (rulebook)                  N GDW $20
>TNE - Path of Tears                                       N GDW $12
>TNE - Players Forms                                       N GDW $10
>===================================================================
>
>Plus postage and handling. For postage and packaging for orders
>in the US, add $3.00 or 10%, whichever is greater. For postage
>and packaging for orders outside the US, add $5.00 or 15%,
>whichever is greater.
>
>Key to abbreviations:
>
>    C = Classic Traveller
>    M = MegaTraveller
>    N = Traveller New Era
>    # = generic sci-fi
>    % = multiple campaign settings covered, including Traveller.
>    GDW = Game Designers' Workshop
>
>    fasa = Freedonian Aeronaughtical & Space Administration (Freedonia//Far
>    Frontiers Sector).
>
>    DGP = Digest Group Publications (Publisher of Travellers' Digest,
>    headquartered on Deneb//Deneb Sector).
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Orders are processed in the order they are received, so let me
>know ASAP if there's anything you want on the list above, and
>I'll gladly set it aside for you. I have multiples of some of the
>items listed, so the chances are good I'll still have the ones
>you desire.
>
>Sale ends August 31, 1997.
>
>
>Sincerely,
>
>Roger Sanger
>Game Source
>
>
>P.S.:  My game collection continues to grow, so if there is
>anything you are looking for, from -->any<-- game system, be sure
>to ask.
>
>
- -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
(c)1997 Sam Thomas  |Email:sinbad@dfw.net|
Sinbad Sam, Owner and Operator of Sinbad Sam's Saloon 
Chief Weapons Designer For Reddkneck Arms and Munitions
- -----------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 21:15:01 -0600
From: Erwin Fritz <efritz@glja.com>
Subject: Re: Brokers

Glenn Grant wrote:
> 
> Problem: If skill levels are supposed to range from 0 to 15 in T4.1 (to put
> them on par with stats), then a professional level in a skill ought to be
> 6+. There would be almost no professionals with Broker-1.
> 

Not quite. We could have a situation very much like that I once had
with a stock broker. The broker's assistant invariably was the one
with whom I dealt and that person was useless. So, you find a broker
but that person's apprentice is doing the deal for you.



- -- 
Erwin Fritz
Unix/NT/LAN Guy
Gilbert Laustsen Jung Associates Ltd.
http://www.glja.com

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 97 22:21:39 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: Trader skill vs Broker skill

On 08/21/97 at 12:26 AM,  Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior) said:

>>Maybe, maybe not.  Rob Prior has a good system on his website for
>>developing Trade Tables that you might want to look at, it includes tasks. 

>Glad you liked it, Eris.

You're welcome, Rob. 

I've been working on an expanded version of the LBB Trade chart (145
entries, running from -15 to 130, using a d100 with modifiers to access the
trade items.  I'm coming from the POV that almost anything *could* be
available, but quantity, quality and cost is going to vary based on where
you are. ;->

><<http://www.interlog.com/~dmci104/GamingClub/Traveller/trade.html>> is
>the URL.

>I've always seen Broker as a skill in bargaining, while Trade is a skill
>in marketing.  That is, a broker can get you the best price on grapple
>grommets, and sell them for you as well, but a trader will be able to
>predict whether grapple grommets are really in demend on Regina or not.

>In terms of starship crew functions, the trader will know what kind of
>cargo buy, while the broker handles the actual buying and selling. (Of
>course, a single person could have both skills.)

Yep, that about sums it up. 

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

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 23:58:54 -0400 (EDT)
From: SemoFetus@aol.com
Subject: Re: Early Charges?

>I thought that the UPS strike started 2 August...that is over 2 weeks 
>after I was charged.  Before I go to the BBB I was wondering if 
>anyone else experience this?

Imperium Games is hellishly behind schedule on alot of things.  Going to the
Better Business Bureau, if they can do anything for you, can only cause more
trouble than its worth.  I'll bet that Imperium games will get to the
Citizens of the Imperium deal as soon as possible.

You're dealing with a small company, not a massive multi-tentacled
conglomerate.  Please don't screw them (and us) like this.

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 00:09:43 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: Re: RoM/Terra TL

Leroy W.L. Guatney writes:

>Now if you are telling me that a bunch of Terrans at TL14 can take on the
>Third Imperium at one entire tech level disadvantage

   This is incorrect.  We know that the Imperial Army and Marines were
equipped with the Trepida grav tank and its APC sister vehicle at the
start of the Rebellion (1116), and that these were *standard* AFVs
(meaning that they are the most numerous type).  Both vehicles were TL
14, *not* TL 15.  It would therefore be logical to conclude that the
First Solomani Rim War (which occured over 100 years earlier) was fought
between two opponents that had TL 14 ground forces (space forces being
another matter).

>--well let's just say
>that is like the Terrans in their 4900 ton ships taking on 74,900 ton Vilani
>ships. (In fact, I would venture a guess that the Vilani would need only
>one ship!)

   Your assumption is that the Terrans were fighting the largest Vilani
warships, which IIRC was not the case early on.   Just as the U.S.
didn't throw its full weight into the Vietnam War, the Vilani held out
its best forces.

>Sorry, but it is clear to me, that Terra was TL15+ at the outset of the
>Solomani Rim War, c. 998.

   Actually this is possible, since Terra was the capital of the
Solomani Confederation (IIRC, Zhodane is one TL higher than the rest of
the Consulate).  The loss of Terra would then leave the Confederation
without a TL 15 world--a devastating blow, which would give further
support to the reasoning of Imperial commanders that Terra must be
captured.

>Well, for the same reasons, if the Imperium _was_ TL15, wouldn't they be
>using their TL15 troops.  We could throw out the TL tables of the Imperia
>in the much heralded MT Ref's Companion, but that would at the same time,
>eject the only direct quote for a TL12 RoM.

   Once again, for whatever reason (probably the cost of replacing
equipment), the Third Imperium was fielding TL 14 equipment for its
ground forces in 1116, even though there were clearly many worlds that
were TL 15.

>>(Does anyone with access to Supplement 10 remember if there were any TL-15
>>worlds on the Solomani side of the border even in 1107?)
>
>None whatsoever.  They were all TL14 max.  One world over the border in
>Aldebaran sector, adjacent to the Near Bootes cluster was TL15.  That was
>in GDW's newsletter "Imperial Lines" #2.

   What was the name of that world?

>For the record, Inv: Earth gives _both_ sides TL14 troops counters.  The
>Imperial forces are broken down as to Regulars, Colonials, etc., but no
>such distinction is made for the Solomani counters.  (Exactly why I
>stated that the claim that Earth was TL13 was, well, an exaggeration.)

   This fits nicely with establish canon.  I'm not sure what the problem
is here.  While it is possible that the Imperium and Solomani had some
TL 15 commandos or other small elite formations, at the scale the game
is conducted, they would not have been a factor in the fighting (or
would have been lumped in with a lower tech formation).

>As for RoM TL, the little bit of text devoted to TL period in the game
>just kind of dances around what TL is, only to really say that TL 12- is
>in one category, and TL13+ is in another (for combat purposes).  That is
>why I can see TL15 being a possible explanation for the Solomani.

   Wrong...and well, by now *everybody* knows the rest.

   It is entirely consistent for Terra to be early TL 15 in 1000, TL 11
during the Long Night, TL 12 during the RoM, and TL 10-12 during the
Interstellar Wars.

>S&A states clearly that the max Solomani TL is 15, an "adjustment" from
>CT days.  We also need to factor that in for evaluating CT sources, if
>we are going to be precise about this.

   If this is the best you can do for evidence to support a higher TL
for the RoM, I'm going to have to insist that you take a Deductive Logic
course while attending university.

>As an analysis/strategy point, in response to a my "case being weaker",
>I only focused on the Inv: Earth game, since that is the only post-RoM
>published source of Terra's TL until 1107/1110.  I:E reinforces the
>quote of 1107 Terra's TL being 15, which is about as far as they wanted
>to get specific on the subject.

   While I:E provides us some clues to the TL of Terra c. 1000, it is
not even remotely a valid source of information for TL info on the RoM. 
Far too much time had passed between the two eras.

Regards,

Harold

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 00:48:50 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: Re: UNanswered

Glenn Crawford writes:

>Anything the UN does is a joke. An alliance of nations I can believe, most
>likely western european and japanese but not the UN. If we depended on the
>UN to get things done, they woule be UNdone.

   While the UN is currently not much more than a debating and posturing
club, there are some things that it does with regard to air safety and
health care issues where it is a significant positive influence.

>It should be something to the effect of the
>US/European/Japanese/Canadian/Australian alliance discovers jump drive and
>brings back the info to NATO (which includes 75% of Earth by then)

<snip>

   So NATO saves Earth?  Hmmm...that scenario is too Western-centric for
my tastes, and I'm an unabashed running dog American imperialist who
listens to too much Rush Limbaugh and G. Gordon Liddy (Prepare to be
culturally assimilated.  Resistance is futile.  :-)  ).

   I would prefer to think that after the turn of the century, the UN
evolves into something a bit more potent.  IIRC, the canon sources
indicate that by discovering jump drive, the UN is finally able to
obtain finanical independence and assert itself without worrying about
certain nations withholding funds and blackmailing it into doing their
bidding.

Regards,

Harold

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 00:58:48 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Early Charges?

In a message dated 97-08-20 21:07:10 EDT, you write:

<< 
 I thought that the UPS strike started 2 August...that is over 2 weeks 
 after I was charged.  Before I go to the BBB I was wondering if 
 anyone else experience this?
>>

Too many people shoot from the hip on this stuff. Imperium told you an answer
(delay due to UPS). Sure, they ordered the color printer before the strike,
and it hadn't come by the time of the strike, and now its delayed.

Really, the choice is up to you... 

If you think Imperium Games is lying to you, cancel your order and have them
reverse the charges.

If you think they are telling the truth, but don't want the Citizens stuff,
then cacenl and have them reverse the charges.

If you want what they say they'll send you, then wait for it. Or even tell
them you really want it, so hurry.

But I'm really tired of the Imperium bashing that the net and the TML seems
to love to do.

I'll share what I said at GenCon at least twice...

When GDW closed its doors (announced later 1995; accomplished by Feb 29,
1996), Traveller reverted to me. I talked with four potential publishers. One
figured they would have a new rules book oiut by GenCon 1997 (right, this
year), and maybe one module per year thereafter. Another had just bought an
out-of-print fantasy role-playing game and was looking for a science-fiction
title to round out their line. Yet another wanted to buy the rights so they
could own the potential for electronic games, but really didn't want to put
out a print version.

And Imperium stepped up to the plate, offered lots of support and planned on
getting a revised version out by GenCon 1996 (they did it; in some ways only
barely, but they did it). The also planned on at least one module per month
thereafter, and they did that, despite a change in management half way
through the production cycle.

Where would we be if Imperium had not stepped forward? While meaning no
criticism of other operations at all (indeed, Tantalus sponsors this mailing
list), we would be where 2300 AD is... not in print.

There are things I wish were different. I am personally revising T4 into T41
(and many don't agree with my decisions, but I promise you it will be worth
the wait). Many people are participating in the revamp of T4 and in the
publication of the upcoming T4 products.

BTW flagella@concentric.net is Courtney Solomon's right-hand person and is
dedicated to handling all of the problems that come up the best they can be.

I spoke some time ago with one of my former partners and he talked about how
genteel and understanding everyone on his particular mailing list was... why
aren't we at that point too?

<rant mode off>

Marc Miller

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 01:52:44 -0400
From: "Michael D. Peters" <Letterworks@Comten.com>
Subject: Silly question

This is sort of in relation to the Ahhhhggg thread currently going on
but enough off of the subject that I'm posting it as a new tittle.

How may people on the List actually play out ship to ship combat during
role play sessions? Graig Berry touched on my  point in his reply in TML
1997, referring to a play group being hauled over by a dreadnaught,
while in a 200 ton ship. To paraphrase (some more) he basically said
that the ship was to big for them to fight.
I've DL'ed Joe Hech (and several others)'s role playing combat system
and with a few exceptions like waht i've read in it (time permitting
I'll get to read the rest in the near future). I hope the update it for
FFS2.
I also like to make star ship deck plans, building plans, etc. and I
like them to be consistant, which is one of the reasons I've like
Traveller, and enjoyed  Highguard, Trillion Credit Squadron, etc. FFS
was a bit different from earlier works but an excellent addtion
(particularly the alternate tech, sadly, from what I've read, missing in
the new book). But I've never used the Basic Traveller (CT) star shi
combat system!
I missed Brilliant Lances (it came and went during a non-gaming period
for me) and the basic Traveller rules were too basic for my group. We
did quite a bit of TCS,(Kinda the En Guard of the Traveller universe)
but when I reff'ed Traveller, a role playing game, the groups I've had
over the years were more interested in role playing (ie "what's
happening to me?") than breaking a role play session up mixed with war
gaming. When we war gamed space combat (not often, usually these
sessions were WW2 armour or sea combats) we gamed with large units that
didn't have any role playing elements.
Any way, as I asked before rambling on (I'm tired! sorry). How many
actually run the combats during a role play session, how many just hand
wave them off, and how many run ship to ship combat as, basically a
seperate game (maybeor maybe not involveing the ship thier role players
are on)? I really am curious to see what the answers to this question
look like.
Good Night
Mike Peters

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 06:16:41 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: zero-G beds (my vote:no)

On Wed, 20 Aug 97 19:51:43 -0500, Eris Reddoch wrote:

> On 08/20/97 at 09:51 AM,  Glenn Hoppe <starcity@sk.sympatico.ca> said:
> 
> >I agree completely. My SleepWell(tm) Narcoplast sleeping surface is
> >designed to work under the 1G standard gravity of the starship. It folds
> >down from the wall, like beds in those small cheezy apartments in the
> >movies, sans noisy box-spring.
> 
> I do it with the bed as an easychair/sofa/futon/bed type of thing.

Eris, I'm surprised you didn't think of using hammocks (a la
Gilligan's Island).  With grav plates located in the floor, walls, and
ceiling, synchronized to alter gravity in a continuous loop (floor...
wall... ceiling... other wall... floor... wall.. etc.), you could get
yourself up to some pretty impressive speeds!  Of course, the
Skipper's hammock would have to include a reinforcing weave of
superdense...

James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 00:10:23 -0700
From: Douglas <douglas@teleport.com>
Subject: RE: Early Charges?

<snip>

>I spoke some time ago with one of my former partners and he talked about how
>genteel and understanding everyone on his particular mailing list was... why
>aren't we at that point too?

Marc,

I'll toss my two cents in, something I have not done recently.

I have all but dropped off the list (though I still doggedly get it, I've 
not read it seriously for several months...) because of the tone.  Everyone 
here seems to like traveller, or at least claims too, but it's so darn 
negative!  I caught myself on a serious attitude slide downward about T4, 
and almost got to the point where I couldn't understand why my players kept 
coming back!

And having fun...

That was the key for me, despite what the gearheads, and the rulelawyers, 
and the why-won't-it-play-like-life (as if I wanted to play a game true to 
life!), and the bash-the-[insert nationality here] types say...my players 
are enjoying themselves.  Am I playing true T4? No.  Have I ever played 
canon traveller?  Hey!  That's no too...  Does anyone care?  NO!

So, instead of contributing ideas (like I tried to do in the beginning), I 
watch for THUDD, new products, and gear.  I read from a select few authors 
(ones that I know promote positive feelings for the game, and/or 
constructive criticisms.  I (sadly) ignore the rest.

For my players, and my own enjoyment, I will not allow myself to get sucked 
into the whirlpool of IG bashing.  Hopefully, sometime soon, either a new 
list will spin off (I've seen some calls for them) or the nay-sayers will 
feed themselves into oblivion and I will be able to read a whole digest 
without getting depressed.

By the way, I've caught some of the new skills - I'm going to have to go 
back over my archives to pull 'em all out!
_________________________________________________________
E-Mail: douglas@teleport.com
Http:\\www.teleport.com\~douglas

All I ask of a firearm is that it be reliable, accurate, and capable of 
dropping a god at 500 meters
_________________________________________________________________________

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 23:19:29 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Re: Brokers

Glenn Grant wrote

> Marc, you said:
> 
> >Brokers can influence consultations of the Actual Value Table, but must be
> >paid a commission. Brokers, however, vary in quality and availability by
> >starport.
> >
> >Broker  Starport        Mod     Comm
> >Broker-4        A       +4      20%
> >Broker-3        AB      +3      15%
> >Broker-2        ABC     +2      10%
> >Broker-1        ABCD    +1        5%

> Problem: If skill levels are supposed to range from 0 to 15 in T4.1 (to put
> them on par with stats), then a professional level in a skill ought to be
> 6+. There would be almost no professionals with Broker-1.
> 
> Consider: you go to Merchant Academy for four years, graduating with, say,
> Broker-2 and Trader-2. You enlist in the Merchants, automatically getting
> another Broker (Business). Let's say you serve three terms, getting a
> commission and two promotions, thus you get about fifteen more skill rolls.
> If you concentrate a lot of rolls on the Career and Social tables (but not
> exclusively), you could get about four more levels of Broker. At rank 02
> you automatically get another Broker (Business).
> 
> Thus, by age 34 you've got Broker-8. Now _that's_ a professional level of
> skill. Anybody with Broker-1 is just dabbling.

> The point is that your Broker table, above, looks like a holdover from the
> CT/MT era. If *specialization* skill levels are going to be so much higher
> in T4, such rules are going to have to be radically rethought.

How about the following:

Broker  Starport        Mod     Comm
Broker-8        A       +4      20%
Broker-6        AB      +3      15%
Broker-4        ABC     +2      10%
Broker-2        ABCD    +1       5%

For every _two_ full levels in Broker skill you may add 1 to the roll on
the Actual Value table (to a maximum of +4).  For every level of Broker
skill used the Broker will require a commision of 2.5%.  Half the
qommission ammount is the Brokers actual earning (1.25% of sale price
per level of skill applied) the other half of the Brokers fee is used
for expenses.

(Some earlier version of Traveller specified that half the Brokers fee
went towards expenses, this should probably be restated.)

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 03:40:21 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: Re: Relativism in Traveller

Leroy W.L. Guatney writes: 

>In the recent past, Harold Hale has attempted to get a discussion going
>on relativism.  He raises some points/issues about the use of "relativism"
>in Traveller writings.  I suspect that he was largely biased by its use in
>the MT heyday, and TNE to a lesser extent, but I'll let him explain that if
>he desires.

   Basically my view is that while you can publish a lengthy essay from
the point of view of the pit bull terrier Lucan kept around for those
*special* executions, there is always some underlying truth we call
"reality", which is the what is really happening or has really happened
in the universe.  "Reality" is not dependent upon points of view--in
fact point of view frequently distorts "reality".

   In the days of CT, material published was pretty much "reality". 
There was very little point of view writing, and when there was it was
usually made clear that what was being expressed wasn't necessarily
true.  It was almost entirely up to the referee to generate material
that threw in distortions and caused ambiguity.

   This changed with MT.  Much of the material generated for MT was done
from the point of view of a particular faction, particularly the DGP
stuff.  However, when the point of view of a commentator excluded
information or distorted "reality", we were given a Referee's Section
that explained what was really true ("reality") and what wasn't.

   With TNE, there were a great number of subplots, some of which were
strongly hinted at, some of which it appeared were designed to be
mysteries.  There is still an underlaying "reality", but at times it
appears the only people who know what all the aspects of that *reality*
is are employed by GDW.  However, nothing that appears in print
contradicts what has been presented as "reality" before.

   This brings us to Marc Miller's Traveller.  Most things are relative,
as those writing MMT themselves are to a greater or lesser degree fuzzy
on what "reality" is in the Traveller universe.  Items are presented as
fact ("reality") even though they basically contradict previous material
(and even themselves).  This contradiction in what is "reality" and what
isn't causes a rift between those who play MMT and previous versions of
the game.  Leroy comes along and implies that "reality" has always been
relative, which is of course incorrect.

>Yes, things were written from a Vargr point of view, and we had we also had
>the Vilani side of things, presented to us in _Vilani & Vargr_.  That is
>sort of natural given the fact that the book's nature.  If I understand HH
>correctly, where relativism fails in V&V (just _one_ example, there are
>more) is in that there are not too many characters who are of either "V"
>that are adventuring in those spheres--they are characters of those races
>in the Third Imperium.

   My take on things is that publications like V&V are saved because
they include a section for referees that provides you with a check
against "reality".  Otherwise, as a referee you can't make a value
judgement about the information presented and it is useless.

>At the same time, I would argue that relativism is a fact of life, though
>it may be done better, with explanations in future work.  In that extent,
>I agree with Harold.  

   Only two groups of people *must* know what *reality* is--the game
writers and the referees.  The game writers must know because it is
necessary to tell a coherant, consistent story.  The referee must know
so that he or she can also tell a coherant story, whether it is based on
what the game writers tell him, his or her own work, or a combination
thereof.  Players can be treated like mushrooms (an old joke).  Point of
view stories provide players with material that allows them to "feel'
the part of an alien (or not so alien) race, and "walk a mile in their
shoes."  

>So, I see relativism as a reality.

   This to me is a basic contradiction.  Unlike in real life, Truth
(that is philosophical Truth) is always knowable, provided that someone
puts it into print.  While it sometimes makes sense to withhold
information from players, even lie to them, to believe that this should
be extended to everyone is just plain wrong.

Regards,

Harold

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 10:45:04 +2
From: "RFXn" <mlaakso@utu.fi>
Subject: Re: Humans and Zero-G (was: Sex in zero-G)

On 20 Aug 97 at 23:59, Andrew Moffatt-Vallance wrote:

> The curiosity about zero-g sex is truely one of the few universal
> constants amongst Traveller players :*). In my games I take a
> conservative approach (couple embrace, camera pans upward, scene
> fades out in soft focus; cut to breakfast on the terrace the next
> morning).

	*nod* I think that's about the best way to handle sex in gaming, 
unless a) there's something odd/weird/dangerous going on (the other 
person is a robot, is trying to kill the PC, or the PC just 
won't believe when told he'll hurt himself in zero-G etc.) and b) the 
subject is handled tastefully.

	Talking about sex: I have noticed a foreign society's reactions
to sexuality are a considerable factor when cooking up new cultures 
for Traveller. Try comparing ancient Greek, feudal Japan, Victorian 
England and the modern MTV-culture, just to give you an idea.

	"You have a cargo of WHAT? Silicone implants?! ... uhhh sure, bring 
them in for all I care, I don't think you'll find a broker crazy 
enough to take those. Oh and it's _Ms._ Customs agent, by the way."

	Close your eyes and think of Vland. :)


/RFXn     mlaakso@utu.fi        aka. Matti Laakso
 -Phone: +358-(0)2-237 9928       YO-Kyla 19 A 11
 -IRC: RFXn                       FIN-20540  TURKU
 -Talk: RFXn@delenn.yok.utu.fi    Finland

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1724
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Thursday, August 21 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1725



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re:  Grid for Combat (was Re: Yet another of the MULTITUDE of Requests to Marc)
<CT,MT> Vilani/Terran ships of the First Interstellar War
Re:  Chemistry Skill
Re: Task Resolution
THUDDD ballot
Re: Porrozlo
Re: Task Resolution
Re: Silly question
Bye
That DAMNED Half Die!
RE: Task Resolution
Re: Troupe style
Re: zero-G beds (my vote:no)
Re: Brokers
IG Bashing, etc, etc...
RE: Traveller-digest V1997 #1724
Re: History skill (was T41 Skills Draft C Chemistry)
FFS2 Double Chapters

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 23:50:36 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Re:  Grid for Combat (was Re: Yet another of the MULTITUDE of Requests to Marc)

Michael D. Peters wrote
> Subject: 
> 
> Marc Miller  wrote:
> 
> (snip)
> 
> > That, of course, is the challenge... as I approach the combat rules.
> > My
> > intention (not having yet reviewed the combat rules in depth as yet)
> > is to
> > rewrite combat as a task based activity which differentiates between
> > the
> > various skills.
> >
> > Marc

> When you begin reviewing the combat rules please give consideration to
> revamping them into a square grid format (say, something similar to
> MAYDAY or Azhanti high Lightning's systems). I realize that you are
> attempting to keep the basic rules simple but I don't believe that a
> change like this would add all that much complexity and will make it
> much easier fro those of us that LIKE miniature combat. This was one of
> the major complaints I've had since T1 (CT) came out in the 70's, that
> is until the above named suppliments (games) came out. Thanks for any
> consideration you give to this suggestion.

I would also like to see a grid system return.  I think it would be
_vital_ that the scale used be the same used to _draw_ starship deck
plans.

This might make it possible to make a tabletop miniatures combat game. 
As Games Workshop has shown you can make a lot of money doing this if
you do it right.

Has anyone out there played Games Workshops Space Hulk (tabletop not
computer)?  I have always thought that Warhammer 40K's Space Marines
owed a sizeable debt to Travellers Imperial Marines in Battle Dress
(although they are both derived from Heinleins power armor in Starship
Troopers).  When I played the introductory scenario in which the Space
Marines were trying to make it off the giant derelict spaceship (or
Space Hulk)and were fighting off the Genestealers (nasty Alienlike
aliens) it seemed strongly reminiscent of the Azhanti High Lighting
Scenario in which the Marines are trying to get off the damaged ship
before it sinks into the gas giants atmosphere and they have to fight
off the blobs that inhabit the gas giant.

Now I happen to think GW's games are a bit pricy but I would love to see
something similar for Traveller.  Tabletop Minis games are very visual
and look cool.  This would help in marketing Traveller.  I think that a
tabletop game with half a dozen Imperial Marines in TL15 Powered Battle
Dress against a dozen TL 14 Zhodhani Consular Guard teleport specialists
with combat armor (T4's unpowered Battle Dress would be fun to play and
great to get people into Traveller.  I suspect it would be a wee bit
expensive to develop but we can dream.  I see a point based system for
assembling balanced forces and a new Army Codex (er Alien Forces Guide)
every few months or so.  The boxed game would be $70 or so & feature the
Imperial Marines vs Zhodhani mentioned above.  (I picked Zhodhani
because they have a good visual look and their psionic powers would make
for an interesting game but if we want this to be a Milieu 0 game I
guess we would have to pick someone else.)  Naturally this game would be
supported by lots of pretty looking expensive 28mm pewter miniatures.
 
After marketing this minis game for a few years (while regularly raising
the prices for them) Imperium Games would stop making the Traveller RPG
and concentrate only on Traveller: Space Combat.  Then they would set up
their own chain of retail stores, which only sold Traveller materials. 
The Journal of the Travellers Aid Sociey would go to full color and
gradully morph into an add for this months new miniatures.  Then a
little while after that they would decide that none of the distributors
really understood them and start going direct to all the stores.  Their
prices would continue to rise during this whole time.  But I guess
nothing like this could ever happen, it is too improbable, right ?  :)

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 01:52:01 -0600
From: lguatney@carbon.cudenver.edu (Leroy William Lu Guatney)
Subject: <CT,MT> Vilani/Terran ships of the First Interstellar War

I was just purusing the tables in HIGH GUARD (remember that in terms of
ship design, especially at these TL, there is not much difference between
CT and MT) and came up with the following:

    To hit the Vilani:

       Terrans are -2 to hit and penetrate (all tables) for (best)
         computer matchup (assumes Model/3 for Terrans, Model/5 for Vilani)

       factor-6 PA needs a base throw of six (6) to hit, +2 for computer
         difference, +2 for Agility (or more depending on the ship), -1 for
         size (depending on the ship)

         needs a 9+ to hit an Ersha class Vilani Battle Cruiser

       factor-7 Missile needs a base throw of three (3) to hit, +2 for comp.
         diff, +2 for Agility, -1 for size (+1 if at short range, but Terrans
         "may" have superior agility and can pick range)

         needs a 6+ (7+ at short range) to hit an Ersha class Vilani BC
         needs a 6+ to penetrate Ersha Energy weapons, 7+ to penetrate
         Ersha Lasers, and 8+ to penetrate Ersha Repulsors


    The damage done (if hit/penetrate, assuming Vilani have fib computers):

         2D6   Result       w/Nuclear Missiles    w/Nuclear Missiles
               Surface Explosion Table            Radiation Damage
          2    Fuel-1            Fuel-1                No Effect
          3    Weapon-1          Weapon-1              Weapon-2
          4    Weapon-1          Weapon-1              No Effect
          5    No Effect         Fuel-1                Weapon-2
          6    No Effect         Weapon-1              Weapon-1
          7    No Effect         Weapon-1              Weapon-1
          8    No Effect         Fuel-1                Weapon-1
          9    No Effect         Weapon-1              Weapon-1
         10    No Effect         Weapon-1              Weapon-1
         11    No Effect         No Effect             No Effect
         12    No Effect         No Effect             No Effect


    Terrans have at their disposal (for ships up to 4,900 tons):

       Lasers, Missiles, and Sandcasters turret-mounted,
         factor-6 PA 100-ton bays, factor-7 Missile 100-ton bays

       No Spinal Mounts are available to the Terrans.

       Max Jump is J-1, Max Maneuver is M-6, Max Armor is 9 and A-9 requires
         40% of the ship

    Conclusions:  The Terrans, if using nuclear weapons (No dampers to defend
       with at TL11) have the best chance at forcing the Vilani to disengage
       do to battle reduction of all weapons, which would require 78 Wpn-1
       hits, though disengagement would probably happen sooner than that,
       though with Ersha's Armor, it could wait until then if needed.  The
       tactical situation would also depend on whether or not it was fueled
       at the start of the battle or not.

    The Ersha mounts a factor-K PA Spinal Mount.  Against Terran ships at
       armor factor-6 (30% of ship), the automatic critical hits are
       reduced to zero, and the Spinal Mount would get only 5 rolls (2 rolls
       if the Terran ships are A-9) on the SE/Rad damage tables with only
       armor as a +DM.  Even against A-9, the Terrans can not defend against
       Maneuver drive hits, which in turn reduce agility, which makes it
       easier to hit, ...


  Ersha Class        VBC- P1224E3- B90004- 86K08- 0    87,791.3 MCr  74 Kt
   "Esiimmir"             bearing   1   8  611 8          Crew=693
                          batteries 1   A  711 A            Tech=B

  Passengers=0. Low=0. Cargo=710. Fuel=17760. EP=2960. Agility=2.
  Marines=222. Fuel Refinery and Scoops. BU-Comp. Spare Fuel=2960.
  Spare EP=317.          Used by:  Vilani Grand Imperium of Stars


  74,000 ton Ersha Class Battle Cruiser (Vilani)
    Jump-2
    Maneuver-2
    Agility-2
    PowerPlant-4
    1xFactor-K Particle Accelerator
    1xFactor-9 Sandcaster battery
   10xFactor-4 Repulsor batteries
    7xFactor-8 Laser batteries
    1xFactor-6 Energy battery
   10xFactor-8 Missile batteries w/magazines
    2xModel 5/fib computers
  Crew Complement
    Command     -  37
    Engineering - 155
    Gunnery     - 131 (includes 10 Missile magazine gunner's mates)
    Marines     - 222
    Service     - 148
    -----------------
                  693
  Spare fuel allows for 40 Fuel-1 hits, or combinations thereof

  Perhaps the Vilani only have big ships as well.  Their Consolidation Wars
may have evolved smaller ship designs ala what the Terrans are forced to
deal with.  It could also be that since the Vilani are the biggest on the
block, they would not use too many of the "Ersha" class.  I just ran this one
off to give us an idea of what the flagship of the Fleet might look like.
It is pretty well optimized.

  (Unfortunately, a certain mailing list has been keeping me busy, so I will
have to visit the T4 rules later. <G> IIRC, it looks similar to High Guard in
some ways.)


Leroy Guatney - lwlg@usa.net
 University of Mars, NorthAm Campus
 Class of '98

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 02:58:51 -0700 (PDT)
From: "John R. Snead" <jsnead@netcom.com>
Subject: Re:  Chemistry Skill

David Smart <dsmart@flash.net> wrote:

> "How the Mir's "Oxygen Candles" Work 

> When the Mir's two Elektron oxygen-producing systems are unavailable, 
> the crew burns "Oxygen Candles" to produce the oxygen they need. 
> Following is a brief explanation of how these candles work. This 
> technology is well understood, highly reliable and at least as old as 
> WW1 submarines, where it was already used.  The "candles" are 
> stainless-steel cassettes holding "briquets" (as the Russians call it) 
> of the chemical Lithium Perchlorate, LiClO4, or sometimes 
> Magnesium Biperchlorate, Mg(ClO4)2. 

Cool, so for us gearheads out there, how big are the cassette and
how much does each one weigh?  

Many Thanks-


- -John Snead jsnead@netcom.com

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 02:00:46 -0700 (PDT)
From: "John R. Snead" <jsnead@netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

Marc Miller wrote:

> 1. It uses the half die.

I've no problem with this.
 
> 2. Tasks are too easy.

Yes, very much.  Even highly skilled characters should have a less than
50% chance of success on Staggering and Impossible Tasks.  

> 3. Tasks use full strength Char and Full Strength Skill in the task 
> statement (corollary: skills are unqually represented compared to 
> characteristics).

Yes, this is a *very* big problem.  I still don't like the idea that an
Stat 11 Skill 1 doctor is more capable than a Stat 7 skill 4 doctor. 


- -John Snead jsnead@netcom.com

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 03:02:01 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mark Clark <clarkm@OIT.EDU>
Subject: THUDDD ballot

  I'm afraid I'm going to be on vacation the next two weeks or so and will
be away from my computer.  As a result, I will not be able to post my
usual comments on the different designs - sorry!  However, here are some
comments, based on the designs I have seen so far.


What makes for a superior TL-10 SDB?

1) An airframe hull that allows it to manuever and hide in gas giants and
oceans.

2) Good acceleration to allow it to choose the range of engagement, and
enough g-hours to put the acceleration capacity to use (the more the
better). The capacity should be higher than g-comp, allowing emergency
manuevers. 

3) Defense systems, either good armor or sandcasters.

4) Lots of missiles, but more importantly, the ability to control those
missiles - ideally enough MFD capacity to control a launch spread.

5) Some other sort of weapon system (other than missiles) that allows the
engagement of small targets at lower cost, and the ability to engage in
combat when missiles are fully expended.

6) The best sensor system money can buy - SDBs operate alone most of the
time, and they need to have good systems to find the enemy and decide what
to do (fight or flight).


  My Generica design takes the above factors into account - the best of
the other designs do as well.  I urge you to consider the above when
evaluating the various designs for your ballots. 

______________________________
Dr. Mark Clark
Oregon Institute of Technology

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 10:21:49 +0100
From: "Nick Munn" <N.S.Munn@sheffield.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Porrozlo

Daniel Poulin <pould@netcom.ca>

> Would anyone know where there would be a map of the planet Porrozlo
> (neighbour of Rhylanor in the Spinward Marches)?

I could *swear* I'd seen one somewhere -- Challenge or MTJ I expect.  
I'll look.

Nick
 

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 09:02:57 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

> I suspect you meant, "and level 5 or higher is considered an expert.",
> correct?

Yep.

> I do think it would be *good* if skills and stats ran on appromimately the
> same scale. This implies that with an average Characteristic of 7, an
> average skill should also be *about* 7.

No, I'm not saying that.  I want skills to be about the same as they 
were in CT, ranging from 0-6 or so.

But, I want them to contribute to the overall success of the task 
roll about as much as characteristics contribute to success.  

Either 1 skill level is worth more than 1 stat level, or stats are 
worth less than skills, level per level.

  If this becomes the case, I would
> *prefer* that the skills achieved these levels without using a multiplier
> (ie KB2), might or might not be possible, but I would prefer it, and what
> this means for skills is that 1 is a beginner, perhaps 6 is professional,
> and 9 is an expert.

Right.  I'm taking the opposite side.  I have no love of the 
modifier, but I'd like to keep Traveller skill levels like they were 
in CT and MT.  I don't want another animal like TNE where skills are 
on a different scale.

I have no love of the multiplier, but in my book it beats having a 
whole new definition of skill levels.

In short, I want T4 to be a suped up version of CT--let's only change 
what needs changing and leave the rest alone.

Kenneth.

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 11:19:59 +2
From: "RFXn" <mlaakso@utu.fi>
Subject: Re: Silly question

On 21 Aug 97 at 1:52, Michael D. Peters wrote:

> How may people on the List actually play out ship to ship combat
> during role play sessions?

	I do - just last sunday, the 400-ton trader Iola Violante was 
attacked by a 800-ton pirate-operated trader when leaving the Min 
system. Fortunately, the ship's gunner (your friendly SolSec 
monitor) managed to kill the two incoming missiles, and the pirate 
was later destroyed by a Coast Guard cutter.

	The battle took about 2-3 hours from the 8-hour session. It didn't 
seem like any of the people were; I use a modified Brilliant Lances 
system (players roll versus their modified GURPS skills rather than 
BL target numbers).

/RFXn     mlaakso@utu.fi        aka. Matti Laakso
 -Phone: +358-(0)2-237 9928       YO-Kyla 19 A 11
 -IRC: RFXn                       FIN-20540  TURKU
 -Talk: RFXn@delenn.yok.utu.fi    Finland

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

Date: 21 Aug 1997 12:50:33 +0100
From: Mark Samuels <Mark.Samuels@questintl.com>
Subject: Bye

Got to disappear from the list for a while - too much work, followed by 
holidays!

Have fun,

Mark

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 97 11:50:00 GMT 
From: s.johnson107@genie.com
Subject: That DAMNED Half Die!

On Wed, 20 Aug 1997 05:17:39, CardSharks@aol.com Wrote...

> But in T41 the half die is used more extensively in the game system.
    NOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    This DESERVES a .9c rock!  The damned thing has GOT to go!  May Virus
infect your computer Marc!

Stephen

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 07:48:07 -0500
From: David Reed <david@techrefuge.com>
Subject: RE: Task Resolution

Marc elucidated:
> So here are the objections to the T4 / T41 Task system
>
> 1. It uses the half die.

Nope.  I like it.  But it does make play cumbersome.  ;-(  "Will sacrifice 1/2 
die for peace and quiet, and or food."  I'm ambivalent, and I've missed the 
last few months of this argument (it doesn't sound as if it's changed any).

> 2. Tasks are too easy.

Really?  Throw in another die.  It's the perception of "a chance" that's more 
important than the chance itself... to players.  Heh.  I prefer "really rough" 
tasks.  It makes PCs think more, rather than just 'roll 'n burn'.

> 3. Tasks use full strength Char and Full Strength Skill in the task statement
> (corollary: skills are unqually represented compared to characteristics).

I'm in the "stats are your friend" camp, but I'm willing to negotiate.  (Is it 
me, or has this debate been won by the old fogies in favor of 'experience' over 
prowess?  I leave for a couple months, and gee...  ;-)  What I do NOT want to 
see is another &$#%ing formula!!!  The gearheads got their FF&S, already. 
 Follows is a more intelligent idea, delivered by Glenn Grant <pawn@CAM.ORG>:

> Problem: If skill levels are supposed to range from 0 to 15 in T4.1 (to put
> them on par with stats), then a professional level in a skill ought to be
> 6+. There would be almost no professionals with Broker-1.
[snip]
> While we're on the topic, *is* there a maximum skill level in T4.1? The
> draft I've got doesn't mention one.

There should be...  What was wrong with INT+EDU is maximum "efficient" (on tap) 
skill memory?  It seems we cling to the barrel of the canon, only to throw out 
important little springs.  Hmmm.

> The point is that your Broker table, above, looks like a holdover from the
> CT/MT era. If *specialization* skill levels are going to be so much higher
> in T4, such rules are going to have to be radically rethought. This applies
> to every similar rule in every supplement and rule book. A lot of old rules
> aren't going to work any more.

If we have to bow in the direction of age (experience) before ability...  Let's 
just run up the skill levels instead of formulae.  Otherwise, let's keep the 
status quo.  It sounds as laise faire (sp?) as it gets.

Oh, and while we're on the topic of tasks anyway, how about a codified manner 
to use XP as modifiers to tasks, a la 007?
_________________________________________________________________

David Reed            "We have a saying: 'If you're not confused,
                         then you don't know what's going on...'"
david@techrefuge.com            -Frankie McGuire from Devil's Own

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 14:04:06 +0100
From: "J." <Jonathan@hccm.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Troupe style

Douglas Berry:
>Richard wrote:
>>* Use troupe-style roleplaying, where each player gets to run several
>>characters (including GM characters).
>Here, here!  I've been experimenting with troupe style for the campaign I'm
>writing, and it works well in Traveller.   The players' main PCs are the
>command staff of the Ramble-On Rose, but they also have characters who are
>crewmwn, scientists, and ship's troops.  This makes each adventure
>different, and allows the players to experiment with different
>personalities in the same game structure.
I played in a game like that, all the players had one character on the command
crew of a ship, and another character that was part of the "away team".
It works really well with experienced role-players. The captain of the ship
got to play a low down grunt in the away team and the ships gunner got to play
the marine commander.

>One warning, this should only be used if your players are fairly
>experienced.  The stress of monitoring 3 or 4 characters can result in the
>"Fighter #23" syndrome quickly.
There are ways of avoiding this problem, you can use already established 
characters in the campaign, these tend to have well defined personalities 
and so players can avoid the problems of characters "merging".
If this is not possible try starting each player with one character and 
adding second (or third.....) slowly, after about 5 sessions.

Another thing to try is to let players play some of the minor NPC's in the 
game. Let them play a bartender, shopkeeper or starport official. Just give 
them a note with the characters rough personality and let them do the work for
you. It gives you time to check a few things in your notes/rulebooks and is
a handy way of getting players involved in the session even if their
characters 
aren't.

J.

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 97 08:18:05 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: zero-G beds (my vote:no)

On 08/21/97 at 06:16 AM,  jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay) said:

>On Wed, 20 Aug 97 19:51:43 -0500, Eris Reddoch wrote:

>> I do it with the bed as an easychair/sofa/futon/bed type of thing.

>Eris, I'm surprised you didn't think of using hammocks (a la
>Gilligan's Island).  With grav plates located in the floor, walls, and
>ceiling, synchronized to alter gravity in a continuous loop (floor...
>wall... ceiling... other wall... floor... wall.. etc.), you could get
>yourself up to some pretty impressive speeds!  Of course, the Skipper's
>hammock would have to include a reinforcing weave of superdense...

Ha! Ha! ;->  Hammocks aren't a bad idea, but the convertable chair/sofa/bed
is more versatile.  The only thing you can do with a hammock, besides
sleeping in it, is catching fish.  Ah! The illusive Ring Trout! ;->

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

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 97 08:27:29 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: Brokers

On 08/20/97 at 11:19 PM,  Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net> said:

>How about the following:

>Broker  Starport        Mod     Comm
>Broker-8        A       +4      20%
>Broker-6        AB      +3      15%
>Broker-4        ABC     +2      10%
>Broker-2        ABCD    +1       5%

You're going to hear screams from the "don't change from skill 1 to 6
crowd," but it looks pretty good to me. ;->  I've been thinking about just
expanding the tables so you can keep the mod to skill 1 to 1, and lowering
the commission to 3%/level.  There's nothing wrong with a +8 or even +10 in
a roll on a table..if the table is broad enough and handles mods that
exceed the table max.


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

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 22:01:33 +0800
From: Michael Bailey <mickb@opera.iinet.net.au>
Subject: IG Bashing, etc, etc...

Don't take our criticisms too harshly Marc.  If we seem to be carping on
about faults in T4, it's probably because most of us here are genuinely
devoted to the game in it's myriad forms, and wish it nothing but the best.

On a related note, Pocket Empires finally made it's way to these southern
shores, so naturally I shelled out for it (it's almost a Pavlovian
reaction...see new Trav stuff...buy new Trav stuff).  Having read through
it, I've got to say that this is one of the best supplements I've seen for
any game, anywhere...it broadens the scope of T4 immensely.  Well worth the
A$38.00

Now I'm waiting with baited breath for FFS2 to find it's way Down Under...I
had to buy a second copy of FFS1 when my original began falling apart...and
I'll be falling on it's successor like a Doochten VeldtKommando onto booty
when it finally arrives.

All Hail Discordia,


Michael T. Bailey (mickb@opera.iinet.net.au)

"You drive", he said, "I think there's something wrong with me"
			Hunter S. Thompson - 'Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas'

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 15:41:39 GMT0
From: terry.williams@luton.ac.uk
Subject: RE: Traveller-digest V1997 #1724

>I spoke some time ago with one of my former partners and he talked about how
>genteel and understanding everyone on his particular mailing list was... why
>aren't we at that point too?

Was it Sandy or Greg? The Glorantha list is probably one of the nicest lists
I've ever had the pleasure of reading. No product bashing at all (they 
currently have a setting now but no rules at all) just good discussion &
debate.
Sometimes I wish this list could be a bit more moderate - when it's good its
great but when its bad its appauling!

I've gotten a great deal out of the last few releases. Even FS - without  it
quite a few of us wouldn't be enjoying trying to fix the data - and I hazard a
guess that even if the data had been good people still wouldn't've been happy
about their own favourite sub-sector.

I'm still awaiting FF&S2 to arrive in the UK (the UPS strike I guess) but
reading between the lines it also looks like a good product albeit for
gearheads - Okay it doesn't do everything by all accounts but what supplements
do? 

When all the CT & the early MT stuff came out this list wasn't in existence, if
it was I suspect most of the products would've been bitched about, its only in
hindsight that they're classics now.


Its not a case of giving IG a chance, they're our last best hope :-) for
traveller. With the time and capital invested in traveller, if this one fails I
doubt anyone else will take it up at least for a good long while, so lets stop
worry about how crap IG are and concentrate on helping Marc make this
incarnation the best it possibly can. Andy, Stu, Doug etc didn't bitch about it
they wrote their own stuff and were rewarded by being offered the chance to
develop proper products, presumeably the ones they wanted to buy.

Anyway I've finished mildly venting!

BTW this is all written with a huge smiley all over it (apart from the slight
sigh at the beginning). :-)

Peace & Brown Rice

Terry

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 15:33:31 +0100
From: John_Wood@cbtsys.com
Subject: Re: History skill (was T41 Skills Draft C Chemistry)

Nick wrote:

[snipped  - my definition of history]

   I'd certainly agree this in real life.  However, in Traveller I'd be
   slightly more inclined to give characters a chance to manipulate
   whole societies, in the pattern of Poul Anderson's Trader Team et al.
   or Jerry Pournelle's Falkenberg novels.  (I didn't say it would be
   easy!)  Not that one roll on History skill would enable you to start
   a revolution, but it might tell you *how* to start one.

I see your point, and I think that, on reflection, my definition of the
history skill was a little too oriented
toward the academic study of history rather than the pragmatic type of
skill you rightly suggest is of
interest to the average Traveller player.
     However, I still balk at the analogy between psychology and history -
it just does'nt stand
up. I think history should remain a knowledge skill, so the recall
historical analogy task is fine, but
the manipulate government task is way off, and I think there are two good
Traveller-based  reasons
for asserting this:

1: Marc can correct me if I'm wrong, but the derivation of the
psychohistory aspect of the traveller
background - the psioincs suppressions - is Isaac Asimov's Foundation
series. I cannot claim to
have ever read these books (shame on me) but I have read that a
psychohistorical manipulation
forms the meta-plot of the series. Psychohistory in these books is a
statistical and public relations
based science, requiring access to vast amounts of census and other types
of data and
absoloute secrecy concerning the manipulation - or the experiment itself
affects the outcome. I'd say
this is a fairly good footing on which to keep psychohistory in Traveller -
 there is a world of difference
between psychohistory defined thus, and the outcome of the machinations
(albeit political) of a group
of player characters.

2: Psychohistory has a well established place in the traveller canon - the
Hivers are masters of this
science in the proud tradition of Niven's Pierson's Puppeteers. The fact
that the 3I failed to
manipulate it's population and the status of manipulation as the Hiver's
very own analog of the star
trigger (more subtle, though) is a good argument for confining
psychohistory to the realm of
government and other ultra-resourceful agencies. In other words, this is a
technology beyond the
abilities of the Imperium that serves to define the 'flavour' of a central;
 alien race, so making it a
readily available ability under the history skill diverges from 'canon'.

Of course, there's no reason why players cannot be caught up in a
manipulation, but I'd say a
project of this type is beyond the ken of a single individual or a handful
of individuals. You'd get a
damned good scenario or even campaign out of it though - the truth could
rapidly get lost in a
situation where shadowy figures pull strings behind the scenes, kinda like
the X-Files meets
traveller.

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 09:48:53 -0500
From: Sam Thomas <sinbad@dfw.net>
Subject: FFS2 Double Chapters

For those of you who are going to purchase FFS2, make sure you check out
the pages and chapters. 

Commander X's copy has several chapters printed twice, and is missiong the
staships section because of it.
- -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
(c)1997 Sam Thomas  |Email:sinbad@dfw.net|
Sinbad Sam, Owner and Operator of Sinbad Sam's Saloon 
Chief Weapons Designer For Reddkneck Arms and Munitions
- -----------------------------------------------------

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1725
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Thursday, August 21 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1726



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Brokers
1/2 die.
Re: E21 Idea (was 2047; 1.0 part 1)
Bashing is Poor Form
Re: Porozlo/Rhylanor
Re: Early Charges
Re: Task Resolution
Re: Archaeology skill (was History skill)
Re: Task Resolution
Re: Early Charges?
Re: Silly question
Re: Silly question
Re: Flawed accumulator energy densities
Broker skills
FFS2  v. FFS1
Re: Event Horizon
Re: How Big is Your Starport?

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

Date: 21 Aug 1997 15:18:52 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: Brokers

Assuming that average skill levels in T4.1 will be higher, the broker tables
_do_ need changing.  How about replacing the straight +Broker modifier with a
task roll?

To influence the final sale price:
Opposed, Broker, Int (or Cha if using this characteristics)
Referee: This is an opposed task between buyer and seller. The winner can
adjust the roll on the actual value table in their favour by +/- the
following amount: Marginal Success, +1; Success, +2; Exceptional Success, +3;
Outstanding Success, +4.

Note; I don't have the new taks definition handy, so I'm probably mixing up
MT, TNE, and T4 in the specifics here.  As this is an interpersonal task I
like the idea of making it what it really is: a contest between buyer and
seller.

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 08:30:20 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: 1/2 die.

I have no problem with having one die that is a different color and
counting it as a half die.  Currently, I use Gamescience's "Star" dice
(black with whire flecks and red pips) for my whole dice rolls and a red
die with back pips for the half die.

Folks, it seems that Marc is committed to the half die, lets focus on
making sure that what he gives us to review is gone over in a complete and
detailed manner, and let's get out there and start writing support
materials.  We keep asking for more proofreading, we now have that chance
with T4.1
- --
+------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry         dberry@hooked.net   |
| Gearhead & Planetologist, Traveller since 1977 |
|     Inquistor Magnus, Royal Commission for     |
|               Canon Correctness                |
|         http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|************************************************|
|  "To live effectively is to live with adequate |
|   information."           -Norbert Wiener      |
+------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 10:50:45 -0600 (MDT)
From: Marcus Teter <marcus@geminga.physics.montana.edu>
Subject: Re: E21 Idea (was 2047; 1.0 part 1)

 "Glenn Crawford" <glennc@nelvana.com> wrote:
 
> Quoted Section:
> >Major Power: United States (54 States; 2 states split, 2 others 		join.)
> Power lies with individual State 
> > governments, but 		trend is reversing.
> Fair enough. What are the new states though?

It really could be any.  But I know California seems to be polarizing
North and south (so a split could happen).  Colorado seems to have similar
rumblings (east and west slope).  Purto Rico has been a topic for
statehood off and on over the past 20 years so it could happen in the next
50 years.  The last state, who knows.  I was thinking in terms of Guam,
but it could easily be Canadian or Mexican Border states.  Also, the
Bahamas or the Virgin Islands are not out of the question.

<snip>
> >	Minor Space Powers: Canada, Mexico, Panama.
> A suggestion, distinguish between cooperative space nations (ie nations that
> can go into space on their own but generally cooperate to get there, and
> hangers on (nations that rent facilities only, nations on the
> equator would be like this a lot) 

Agreed.  I think that the distinction between Minor and Potential might be
confusing, which I was using to distinguish the two.  As an aside note, a
lot of the 3rd world entrance is a bit unreal, but I'm trying to get as
many nations involved to increase the possibilities for the second half
of the century. (I'm using fusion power as a hand wave to bring some of
these nations into the game.)

> >	Economic Alliances: NAFTA(USA, Canada, Mexico, Panama, Costa Rica)
> Don't forget Chile is a near member now

I haven't forgoten.  I chose Chile to be the core nation for SAFTA.

> 
> > CC {Caribian Coalitian}(Cuba, Haiti, Dominican Rep, Jamaca,
> Trinadad/Tobago)
> As an anoyance maube. Not as a power

Intended as a regional power only.  They can't be ignored when dealing
with the region since they could cause trouble.

<snip>
> 
> Reality Check: OK
> Imagination Check: OK
> Let's get this baby off the ground!
How about the corporate states?

All right.  I'll continue with the regional breakdowns.  Anyone
interested in setting up population and economic figures?

Marcus A. Teter
 

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

Date: 21 Aug 1997 11:20 EDT
From: "Robert Eaglestone" <eaglesto@nortel.ca>
Subject: Bashing is Poor Form

I and the rest of the Traveller group here in Richardson,
Texas, think Marc Miller made the right choice with
Imperium Games.  Regular, monthly supplements plus an
early game rules release is good marketing.  Exposure and
care+feeding is what will make Traveller grow.

Face it folks.  Marc has created a workable universe
based primarily on his background and the help of capable
people.  He's fed my imagination for 20 years.  So, he 
seems like a capable captain for his game.

Conclusion: constructive support seems to be called for,
as well as patience and flexibility.

Corollary: whatever Marc comes out with, I'll go along with.
If I don't want a supplement, I won't buy it.  But the core
rules are good as I see them, and the background has always
been the 3rd Imperium.

I'm buying T4.1.  Can I submit an order ahead of time?

Rob

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 09:06:03 -0700
From: Chris Griffen <cgriffen@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: Porozlo/Rhylanor

Daniel Poulin wrote:

>Would anyone know where there would be a map of the planet Porrozlo
>(neighbour of Rhylanor in the Spinward Marches)?

As far as I know there is no published map of Porozlo. There are a few
adventures in Book 4: Mercenary and 101 Patrons, however, which provide
names for some of the nations and political parties on that rather besieged
planet.

If you're interested in a New-Era take on Porozlo, you may want to read my
description of the planet at my web site:

http://www.cris.com/~Cgriffen/traveller/sectors/Systems/Porozlo_System.html

I take into account all canonical information I could find and I try to
describe some of the geography as well.

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, 21 Aug 1997 09:00:29 -0700
From: scharlto@ifsna.com
Subject: Re: Early Charges

Marc Miller said:
>I spoke some time ago with one of my former partners and he talked
>about how genteel and understanding everyone on his particular
>mailing list was... why aren't we at that point too?

By any chance, was there a great deal of alcohol involved in this
conversation?  ;-)

The TML has long been a very useful resource for me, and become a sort of
comfortable old friend.  Unfortunately, its the sort of friend who is a bit
unstable, and who you keep locked in the cellar when company comes over,
lest he do something unsightly and embarrasing.

In reality, the IG-bashing seems to be in two forms:  Legitimate (IMHO)
concerns/complaints over IG project management blunders, and pointless
grousing about IG business practices/policies.  The first I see as
legitimate because several people who do project work for IG are on the
TML.  The second I see as pointless as IG management is not part of the
TML; these sorts of issues would be better brought up with IG management.
Despite the various complaints, I have seen a marked improvement in IG
products, but I don't think its fair to expect a 180 degree turnaround in
only six months.

And of course, there is also the general griping/whining that the T4 system
or its components are not exactly what person X wanted, and how that is the
result of some evil plot by the TMl and the techo-gearhead elite.  These
don't seem to be attacks on IG so much as attacks on TML folks who have
worked hard on some IG projects (ref. IG project management blunders
above).

In any event, I was wondering when somebody associated with IG was going to
say something about all this.  If you had waited another day, I would have
won the office pool!

Steve Charlton
Mildly annoyed with, but not alienated by, IG

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 10:01:40 -0600
From: Glenn Hoppe <starcity@sk.sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

Kenneth Bearden wrote:

>   If this becomes the case, I would
> > *prefer* that the skills achieved these levels without using a multiplier
> > (ie KB2), might or might not be possible, but I would prefer it, and what
> > this means for skills is that 1 is a beginner, perhaps 6 is professional,
> > and 9 is an expert.
> 
> Right.  I'm taking the opposite side.  I have no love of the
> modifier, but I'd like to keep Traveller skill levels like they were
> in CT and MT.  I don't want another animal like TNE where skills are
> on a different scale.
> 
> I have no love of the multiplier, but in my book it beats having a
> whole new definition of skill levels.
> 
> In short, I want T4 to be a suped up version of CT--let's only change
> what needs changing and leave the rest alone.

I'm throwing my hat in with Eris on this one. T4(.1) is *not* CT. Many
things are similar, but character generation is quite different (and
better, imho).

The greatest (only?) determining factor of how much value is placed on a
skill level is the character generation process. Marc has clearly
decided that skill levels should be given out a little more easily.
Since that is the case, skills need to be rated more highly. Skill def
*needs* changing. Witness the Entertainer  and Scholar careers.

What really needs to be done is for Mark to *clearly* spell out, in
T4.1, exactly what skill levels roughly correspond to in the real world.
Things like the Broker table, and other throwbacks to the old rating
system, need to be revised. I believe that if a limit is placed on
characteristics, one needs to be placed on skills, too.

T4.1 *needs* a definition of skill levels. I think it should be new.
After all, the entire task system is new, why shouldn't the skill level
definition be changed to fit the task system? The system is different,
lets not limit ourselves by nostalgia...

Descriptions something like:

Skill-1     Novice. Basic familiarity with the application of the skill.
            Normally, professional employment not possible.

Skill-2     Trained. Minimum level for professional employment.
            Character is still considered a beginner.

Skill-4     Proficient. Character is considered competant in his craft.
            Most professionally employed people using this skill possess
            this skill level.

Skill-6     Expert. Character is an expert in her field. She commands a 
            higher wage when professionally employed for her skill.

Skill-8     Master. Those possessing this skill level consistantly
outperform
            most others with the skill. Those seeking only the best hire
            these people.

Skill-10    Virtuoso. Character known to be the at the top of the field,
            perhaps even becoming famous. Realm of the Einsteins,
Trumps,
            Pavarottis, Scottys, Van Goughs...

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 17:12:27 +0100
From: John_Wood@cbtsys.com
Subject: Re: Archaeology skill (was History skill)

On a note related to the history skill, why has traveller not got an
archaeology skill? This is a much more practically applicable adventure
skill than history, and would allow players to examine the remains of
ancient civilizations, fallen societies, and of course ancient sites.
     Although it might seem a skill more appropriate in Call of Cthulhu
than Traveller at first glance, there is a lot of adventuring 'rope' to be
had in archaeology in the traveller background. A good fictional example is
Jack MacDevitts novel Engines of God, the central characters in this are
archaeologists investigating an ancient menace that threatens an
interstellar human society through the archaelogical remains of fallen
alien cultures - a great plot and some nice locations, but a fairly weak
ending.

In traveller terms I'd define archaeology skill as:

The character is experienced in the analysis of past and prehistoric
cultures through the excavation and study of their material remains. The
character has a chance of identifying the age and origins of ancient
artifacts, writings, or architecture and can form hypotheses about aspects
of a culture based on the evidence of these material remains. As with the
history skill, the character may specialize in one or more races, cultures,
regions, or historical periods.

I haven't got the T4.1 task system, so I'll leave sample tasks to others.

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 09:22:36 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

At 11:04 AM 8/20/97 -0400, Marc wrote:
>So here are the objections to the T4 / T41 Task system
>
>1. It uses the half die.

See my other post, but I don't mind the half die.

>2. Tasks are too easy.

Not really, since this is a game, I want my players to suceed most of the
time.  The chart in the new task system is an invaluble aid in setting tasks.
>
>3. Tasks use full strength Char and Full Strength Skill in the task statement

This does not bother me much.


- --
+------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry         dberry@hooked.net   |
| Gearhead & Planetologist, Traveller since 1977 |
|     Inquistor Magnus, Royal Commission for     |
|               Canon Correctness                |
|         http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|************************************************|
|  "To live effectively is to live with adequate |
|   information."           -Norbert Wiener      |
+------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 09:20:17 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Early Charges?

At 12:58 AM 8/21/97 -0400, Marc wrote:

<snip>

>There are things I wish were different. I am personally revising T4 into T41
>(and many don't agree with my decisions, but I promise you it will be worth
>the wait). Many people are participating in the revamp of T4 and in the
>publication of the upcoming T4 products.

Marc,

Let me say thank you for your dedication in making sure that T41 is
everything that we hope for.  I especially aprreciate you coming to us for
or opinions and advice; after plying Traveller for 20 years, it's nice to
be able to contribute.

>BTW flagella@concentric.net is Courtney Solomon's right-hand person and is
>dedicated to handling all of the problems that come up the best they can be.
>
>I spoke some time ago with one of my former partners and he talked about how
>genteel and understanding everyone on his particular mailing list was... why
>aren't we at that point too?

At this point I think that only a few of us are really mad at IG.  Most of
us are still a little upset over things like Starships and the First
Survey/M:0 fiasco, but that's in the past.  The recent releases have proven
to be much better.

At the risk of sounding like Kenneth, I hope you'll take a look at my
combat system when I get it posted, I think it would be an asset for T41

- --
+------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry         dberry@hooked.net   |
| Gearhead & Planetologist, Traveller since 1977 |
|     Inquistor Magnus, Royal Commission for     |
|               Canon Correctness                |
|         http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|************************************************|
|  "To live effectively is to live with adequate |
|   information."           -Norbert Wiener      |
+------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 09:14:43 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Silly question

At 01:52 AM 8/21/97 -0400, you wrote:

>How may people on the List actually play out ship to ship combat during
>role play sessions?

It depends.  If the combat is important to the plot of the campaign, and
everyone seems ready to "ride to the trumpts", I'll haul out Brilliant
Lances and we'll get down and dirty.  If the combat is incidental, or if
the players don't seem enthused by the prospect, I'll use the RPSC system
or just handwave a quick encounter.

 Craig Berry touched on my  point in his reply in TML
>1997, referring to a play group being hauled over by a dreadnaught,
>while in a 200 ton ship. To paraphrase (some more) he basically said
>that the ship was to big for them to fight.

That was my game, and the reaction was exactly what I had intended.  I
needed the players to realize that this was like challenging the USS
Nimitiz and her battle group in a 24' sailboat.

>I've DL'ed Joe Hech (and several others)'s role playing combat system
>and with a few exceptions like waht i've read in it (time permitting
>I'll get to read the rest in the near future). I hope the update it for
>FFS2.

It's a good system.  If the ship is an important "character" in the game (A
scout game where repair yards are non-existant, for example) I'd suggest
using a more detailed system (BL or a varient.. something is sure to be
written for T41.)

>I also like to make star ship deck plans, building plans, etc. and I
>like them to be consistant, which is one of the reasons I've like
>Traveller, and enjoyed  Highguard, Trillion Credit Squadron, etc. FFS
>was a bit different from earlier works but an excellent addtion
>(particularly the alternate tech, sadly, from what I've read, missing in
>the new book). But I've never used the Basic Traveller (CT) star shi
>combat system!

Craig and I used Mayday extensively way back when.. (Craig, did I ever tell
you what fianlly happened to your old desk?)  It was a system that I could
understand  and use as a young player.

>I missed Brilliant Lances (it came and went during a non-gaming period
>for me) and the basic Traveller rules were too basic for my group. We
>did quite a bit of TCS,(Kinda the En Guard of the Traveller universe)
>but when I reff'ed Traveller, a role playing game, the groups I've had
>over the years were more interested in role playing (ie "what's
>happening to me?") than breaking a role play session up mixed with war
>gaming. When we war gamed space combat (not often, usually these
>sessions were WW2 armour or sea combats) we gamed with large units that
>didn't have any role playing elements.

That is a problem.. the turn scale makes role play difficult.  There was
even a Murphy's Rules way back at the beginning about the low rate of
Traveller fire.  This does make running combat and keeping it tinteresting
a challenge for the GM.  But from conversations with Navy types, especially
submariners, it seems that this is the way high-tech combat is fought..
long periods of hunting followed by minutes of terror as the weapons burn
towards their targets.  

A good model for the referee in running space combat might be movies like
"The Hunt for Red October" and the recent HBO original "Deadly Waters" (?)

- --
+------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry         dberry@hooked.net   |
| Gearhead & Planetologist, Traveller since 1977 |
|     Inquistor Magnus, Royal Commission for     |
|               Canon Correctness                |
|         http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|************************************************|
|  "To live effectively is to live with adequate |
|   information."           -Norbert Wiener      |
+------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 11:31:22 -0500
From: yikes@evansville.net (Joseph R. Dietrich)
Subject: Re: Silly question

A lurker makes some noise ...

Michael D. Peters wrote:

>How may people on the List actually play out ship to ship combat during
>role play sessions? Graig Berry touched on my  point in his reply in TML
>1997, referring to a play group being hauled over by a dreadnaught,
>while in a 200 ton ship. To paraphrase (some more) he basically said
>that the ship was to big for them to fight.

>I also like to make star ship deck plans, building plans, etc. and I
>like them to be consistant, which is one of the reasons I've like
>Traveller, and enjoyed  Highguard, Trillion Credit Squadron, etc. FFS
>was a bit different from earlier works but an excellent addtion
>(particularly the alternate tech, sadly, from what I've read, missing in
>the new book). But I've never used the Basic Traveller (CT) star shi
>combat system!

On a related note, why is it that there is not a comprehensive book on
technology other than arms, armor, power plants, and vehicles (AAP&V)? FF&S
only dabbled outside of these spheres, and the various item lists in books
like MT's Imperial Encyclopedia are very limited and quite conservative in
scope (at least that's how they seem to me).

Perhaps this bias towards things that move around and blow up other things
has similar origins to the reason that magazines like "Hot Rodding" and
"Guns and Ammo" are popular. Or maybe it has to do with the assumption that
combat, being the most chaotic of situations, needs the most comprehensive
rules.

Personally, I'd like to see a book on alternative technology -- not the
"alternative technology" of solar sails and Dean Drives, but the technology
that deals with things other than AAP&V. Things that impact on the everyday
lives of characters. You know, that 90%+ of the time that the PCs aren't
shooting or being shot at? I know that the ideas are out there -- the
interesting thread on zero-G beds (among others) has shown that.

After all, we have, what, five or so ship combat systems and a similar
number of AAP&V construction systems? How about a book on all the other
stuff?

I have completely selfish reasons to ask this. One of the biggest problems
I have had in running a good sf game was the lack of such support. Being
none to creative myself, I had a hard time conveying to my players what it
would be like to live in a future-tech society. What are the convieniences
available to a person living at TL 13? Do refrigerators still use freon?
Are there sonic showers, or do you bring (or make) a bunch of water into
space for showers? For that matter, what *is* a sonic shower? Would it
sound wierd?

I already know 80 ways to kill them. Give me something to make them marvel.

:)

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

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 02:08:41 -0400
From: Eric Freitas <edf@atlantic.net>
Subject: Re: Flawed accumulator energy densities

At 03:48 AM 8/19/97 PST, you wrote:
>In mail you write:
>But the voltage drops along a log or exponential (I forget which) curve
>as you discharge it. That's why I said that you'd have to use a lower
>voltage than the cap was charged to. You want one that's a ways below
>the "knee" on the discharge curve. You then need to use something to
>keep the output voltage of your "capacitor + gizmo" *at* the lower
>voltage during the portion of the discharge when the capacitor voltage
>is higher than your nominal output voltage.
>
>This is a *much* messier situation than the discharge curve for a
>battery cell.


Yep, that's right.  I can see two ways of dealing with this.  The first
and simplest way would be to add more capacitors in parallel to 
increase the total capacitance.  This would lower the discharge 
rate, keeping the output voltage above the minimum voltage needed to run
the system.  The second way would be to have a voltage level sensing
controller that would be able to compensate for the voltage drop until
a minimum operating voltage is reached (where it simply shuts down due
to lack of voltage).  

I was going to go into energy densities of alkaline and ni-cad batteries,
but it's late and I've got to get up early for work.  I'll try to take
this up tomorrow.

Eric Freitas
edf@atlantic.net

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 13:00:44 -0400
From: "Glenn Crawford" <glennc@nelvana.com>
Subject: Broker skills

Here is the simple system I used for Brokers:

roll 1D6 for skill level. Add the starport modifier. On a natural 6 treat
this as a roll of 5 and you get a roll again 
1-3 +0
4-5 +1
6 +1 and roll again
Thus if you rolled 3 6's and a 5 the final skill would be 8

Starport
A		+1	(will average to skill 4)
B		+0 	(will average to skill 3)
C		- 1 	(will average to skill 2)
D		- 2 	(will average to skill 1)
E		- 3
X		- 4

It is crude but it kept players on their toes. There was one world (SP B)
that I kept rolling 6+ on every traders skill. The players started getting
wary of that world, except one. He wanted to get on these people's good
sides!

As an alternate, off the top of my head, use the open ended die but roll 2D6
(take the best) for A, 1D6 for B, 2D6 (take the lowest) for C, 3d6 lowest
for D etc.

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 10:09:08 -0700
From: "Brad Urwiller" <ravyn@ptw.com>
Subject: FFS2  v. FFS1

 What differences are there in what is DISCUSSED in both FFS2 and 1.  For
example are all of the following discussed in the newer version (I have the
old):
Starship Creation
Vehicle Creation
Small Arms Creation (Standard, Gauss, Laser)
Artillery level and up weaponry.
Sensors
etc.


 _
 \\
)=3DO-8>  "Nevermore!" quoth the ravyn and nothing more...
 //
 =AF

Brad Urwiller
ravyn@ptw.com

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 18:07:21 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: Event Horizon

On Wed, 20 Aug 1997 19:09:21 +0800, Kenji Schwarz wrote:

> James Lindsay wrote:

> >Why does the pilot continue to move the Lewis and Clark forward
> >(blind) inside Neptune's atmosphere when ranging information clearly
> >puts them on a collision course with the Event Horizon?  Lucky thing
> >they used reverse thrust when they did, eh?
> 
> I've met a couple of ambulance drivers, who probably aren't representative
> of the field, but knowing them did leave me unsurprised at this move.

Ya know... yer right!
 
> >Search & Rescue in the year 2047?  Exactly how many civilian or
> >commercial space vessels are flying around out there 50 years from
> >now?  Why is a "search & rescue" ship named after a team of
> >*explorers*?
> 
> Oh!  Silly me... I thought it was named after that sitcom.  You know, Lois
> & Clark?   Superhero flying off to rescue the damsel in distress?

Ah.

> >With all the ship's power available during the movie ("gravity drive",
> >artificial gravity, 30G ion drives) why can't somebody rig up a few
> >more lights so that everything isn't so damn dark (especially in
> >sickbay)?  How the hell do you perform maintenance or repairs with a 1
> >Watt light bulb?
> 
> Yes; as someone else pointed out, the *outside* of the ship was lit up like
> a Christmas tree.

Maybe the gravity drive turned the ship inside out?  Yeah... that's
the ticket!

Great review, Kenji.  Could you please go and see Mimic when it comes
out this weekend?  We could all use your valuable insight into yet
another (potentially bad) SF movie :P

James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 18:11:46 +0100
From: John Wood <John@elvw.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: How Big is Your Starport?

Continuing with Robert Eaglestone's <eaglesto@nortel.ca> proposal:

I thought I'd pass on one part of the "Compleat Starport" article I
mentioned.

JAK pretty directly equates size with number of berths, and bases this
on population and starport type.

                   A    B   C/F  D/G  E/H
# dice to roll:   P-0  P-1  P-2  P-3  P-4   (P is UWP population digit)
Mod to each roll:  +1   0    0    -1   -2

The result is the # of berths for the world.  If there is an orbital
port, the GM chooses how many are in orbit; if there are multiple ports
on the world, 50% of berths are allocated to ports with the UWP port
class; 25% to ports of the next highest class; and 25%  to the rest.

I quite like this, but what it is missing that your suggestion had is
that it takes no account of traffic.  You wrote:

>Starport size =
>    floor (The number of populated worlds within 2 parsecs / 3)
>    + (Starport class: A=2, B=1, C=0, D=-1, E=-2) 
>    + floor (Tech Level / 4) 
>    + 2 if there is a Naval base
>    + 1 if on an XBoat route
>
>OR
>
>    Value of starports on worlds within 2 parsecs
>     (Starport class: Interdicted=0, Non-Imperial client=1, 
>      A=2, B=1.5, C=1, D=0.5, E=0.25, X=0)
>    + 2 if naval base
>    + 1 if on an XBoat route

How about converting some of your modifiers to extra dice in JAK's
system (so, roll +1D if on an X-boat route)?

Not being up on military matters - how much does the presence of a naval
base affect the size of civilian ports in RL?  Personally I'd give it a
+1 at most, but am willing to stand corrected.

I'm not sure of the best way to deal with neighbours, but I definitely
think it should take their starports into account; therefore I prefer
your second formula.  It would be nice to give extra credit to worlds
sharing a Jump-1 "main" with the target world, and to have a "trailing
off with distance" effect rather than a 2-parsec cutoff, but I can't
think of anything that isn't way too complicated.

A few random thoughts,
 
John G. Wood  |  john@elvw.demon.co.uk  |  Oxford, United Kingdom

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1726
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Thursday, August 21 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1727



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

RE: Ken's TL Based Pricing
Re: IG Bashing, etc, etc...
Re: New ships on my web page
What I'd like to see--Task Resolution
Re: Gearhead Challenge: More on M-Drives!
Re: RoM/Terran TL
Re: Grid for Combat (was Re: Yet another of the MULTITUDE of Requests to Marc)
Re: LaGrange Points
Re: Silly Question
Re: Task Resolution
Re: Task Resolution
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1687
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1690
E21 a la Marcus
Re: FF&S2 Double Chapters & IG Bashing
Re: Task Resolution
RAAM Torpedoes Bubba and Little Bubba

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 18:45:54 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
Subject: RE: Ken's TL Based Pricing

 Have you look at or considered including the Exchange Rates 
> information from TNE (I also believe that this information is 
> available in other published sources, but I do not know which ones)? 
>  It basically relates the value of an Imperial credit from the source 
> world the characters are from, based on starport and Tech Level, to 
> the starport and Tech Level of the planet they are at.  I have used 
> that information to modify prices for items on that world.

To be honest, I think I do have an article (from the Trav Chronicle, 
I think), but I didn't remember it until you just mentioned it.

I use so little of the TNE stuff (and I have a lot of it) because it 
is so different from CT/MT/T4.

Out of sight, out of mind.

> Have you also looked in the World Builder's Handbook under the section 
> Understanding The Technology Profile?  It has a few lines about Tech 
> Level of items verse High and Low Common Tech Levels of a world and 
> how it affects availability and pricing.

Yes, I love this book (used it last night to produce a map of Zila), 
but that section is very vague.  I do use the info though.  This 
governs what can be imported (Novelty TL).

> Up to a point.  I would also like to see something that address the 
> fact that the older (lower Tech Level) the item is, the rarer it might 
> be to find it on a world.  This is to represent the fact that the item 
> is no longer manufactured, but is considered an antique.  Antiques are 
> for the most part a lot more expensive based on their condition.

That's easy to do using my chart.  If you divide from the chart, you 
get more expensive items.  If you multiply from the chart, you get 
less expensive items.

If you, as a GM, decide that a lower tech item that the PCs are 
looking for is an antique and not readily available on the world, 
then divide the TL factor instead of multipling the factor.  The item 
will become more expensive.

This is a good point (and the reason I like to read comments) that I 
hadn't thought about but easily fits into the system.


>> Notes.
>> 
>> You can use these tables in a number of ways.  One way, which may 
be
>> cumbersome for some people, is to calculate each price for every 
item 
>> purchased or shopped.  This means rolling for a starport table for
>> each item, then rolling for a TL table for each item, then
>> calculating the price of each item.
> 
> I would end up using it this way.  No, I'm not crazy, but as I have 
> mentioned before, I wrote a program that I use on my laptop when 
> running a gaming session that has the capability to generate this 
> information for any world, on the fly.  Very useful when characters 
> are looking to purchase something.  I would love to expand it using 
> guidelines such as this.  The program calculates the adjusted price 
> for every item I have in a database, including things such as fuel, 
> berthing costs, meals, whatever.  I can even print the results and 
> give it to the players as a shopping list.

Wow, now that's high tech gaming!

You might be interested in Frank Chadwick's article from BJTAS#1.  It 
is a system similiar to my own (I based my tables on his work) that 
focusses on the buying power of an Imperial credit.

I thought it was too clumsy for my game, but with your computerized 
gaiming tools you would have no problem at all.  It basically 
converts all player money into local currency, then converts all 
items to be purchased into local currency so everything is on the 
same scale.  Then, when the players leave the planet, you convert 
back to Imperial standard credits.

I thought this was a little to much for my game (and so I came up 
with the charts), but it might be the thing (or the inspiration) that 
you are looking for.

  It makes the session go much more quickly when I 
> don't have to roll hundreds of dice to generate passengers and cargo, 
> especially when it does it in 5 seconds and includes specific details 
> about each and every lot, even down to handling hazards.

Sounds awesome!  I usually pre-roll this stuff before we play, but I 
can see the program save time in prep as well.


> My current approach using the Exchange Rates table.  I would like a 
> world not to have a fixed adjustment value for every item and that 
> value not to change as long as the Starport and Tech Level remain the 
> same.  Using the first method would produce fluctuations in price for 
> every item each time the world is visited.  I like this.  Players 
> would never be able to guarantee the price of an item would remain the 
> same each time they visited the world.

That's true, but it is a lot of work unless you are set up (like you 
are) with a computer during the game.

Boy, gaming has come a long way, hasn't it?


 
>> Stun Damage Musings
> 
>> Ken's Combat Tweaks
> 
>> Hand to Hand Attacks

> I would be interested in the first three items (I already have 
> KBv2.0). Just email them to me at clark@bessemer.com

I'll mail them to you in separate e-mails.

You've had some good comments about the system (the antiques).  If 
you don't mind, I'm going to copy this e-mail to the TML for others 
using the system.  The idea of antiques may not have occurred to them 
either.

See ya, Bill,

Kenneth.

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 19:38:48 +0100
From: Simon Early <sre@taz.compulink.co.uk>
Subject: Re: IG Bashing, etc, etc...

I like Traveller and find useful stuff in all of the different 
versions.  I like T4 enough to buy all of it (even things I am unlikey 
to ever use) because

(1) I'm a pack rat-cum-collector (I've seen the envy WBH induces in
    some people, and I'm sure many T4 books will invoke similar envy in 
    10 years time).

(2) I want IG to publish as much Traveller material as possible.

(3) I can afford it (in the days of CT, I got a weekend job so that I  
    could afford my RPG habit).

 
The Emperor may be both naked and dead, but I will dutifully genuflect 
to the decomposing corpse with the rest of the game-nerds :-)


Simon

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 03:39:15 +0000 ()
From: kraehe@bakunin.hb.north.de (Michael Koehne)
Subject: Re: New ships on my web page

Moin Chris Cox,

> If anyone interested, my August THUDDD entry is available on-line at

	as a competing company we are of course intested of what
	you have to offer to the Kaneshi Empire. BTW you should
	chance your laser T4 stats to 3-2-0-0, if the laser
	is realy 10:42,20:21. I would be further interested in
	the exact laser calculation. FYI here are mine (FFS1) :

	Tech-Level      :  10
	Discharge       : 250.0 Mj 100 ROF
	Diameter        :  11.6 m
	Short Range     :  10.0 clicks
	Wavelength      :   2.0 k-anstroems UV
	Effective Range :  20.2 clicks
	Power Input     :  69.4 MW
	Focal Volume    : 264.2 m3 52841.7 kCr
	HPG   Volume    : 100.0 m3 1000.0 kCr
	BeamP Volume    :  12.0 m3 1200.0 kCr
	Displacement    :  26.9 dt
	Mass            : 476.2 t
	Price           : 55041.7 kCr
	Damage          : 10:1/13-40 20:1/13-40 40: 1/6-20 80: 1/3-10 

	can anybody recalculate this using FFS2

By Michael
- -- 
	kraehe@bakunin.north.de		human.is-bremen.de/~kraehe/traveller
		  " ceterum censeo MSDOS esse delendam "

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

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 19:08:40 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
Subject: What I'd like to see--Task Resolution

> I'm throwing my hat in with Eris on this one. T4(.1) is *not* CT. Many
> things are similar, but character generation is quite different (and
> better, imho).

I think it is better, too, but still very compatible with 
CT--especially if you give CT era careers 1 skill per year instead of 
1 per 4 years.  You end up with very similar characters.

> The greatest (only?) determining factor of how much value is placed on a
> skill level is the character generation process. Marc has clearly
> decided that skill levels should be given out a little more easily.

And I agree with this.  It is a good move.

> Since that is the case, skills need to be rated more highly. Skill def
> *needs* changing.

But, I disagree here.

What I am saying is this.  Yes, having more skills is a good thing, 
but there are two ways to have more skills.

Let me illustrate with an example.  Let's say a character is in a 
career for 20 years.  By Marc's method, chargen gives him 20 skill 
levels.  You can divide up these skill levels in two ways.

You can (1):  have a character that ends up like this
              1 level 9 skill
              2 level 3 skills
              5 level 1 skills

Under this division, yes, you are right, skills need new definitions.


Or you can (2):  have a character with more skills than in CT, but 
each specific skill does not range over 6, like this
                1 level 5 skill
                2 level 3 skills
                2 level 2 skills
                10 level 1 skills

Under this second choice, your character has more skills, and still 
each specific skill does not go out of the classical range of 0-6.

In this way, T4 characters can have many more separate skills than a 
CT character, but comparing skill for skill, all T4 skills are 
interchangealbe with CT skills.

And the balance between the old and new is secured.

This is what I would like to see.


Kenneth.

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 19:54:51 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: Gearhead Challenge: More on M-Drives!

Douglas wrote:

>>Can a T4 thruster plate ship travel between an outer gas giant and an inner
>>planet with the fall of in drive efficiency?  Are the calculations in the
>>T4 rules wrong, as they assume constant acceleration to mid-point, and then
>>constant deceleration to 'rest' at target world. If the T-plates fall off
>>mid-way this will effect travel times detrimentally...
>
>According to FFS2, the curoff point for thrusters is about 2000AU for a Sol
>like star.  This makes thrusters very usable within almost any solar system.
>
>Travel times would still make micro-jumps preferable in many cases (Ie,
>Earth to Pluto.)

*Must* buy this book ;-)

Does it have discussion sessions like FFS1?

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"Omnia Mutantur Nihil Interit"  -  Sandman 'The Wake'
"Everything Changes, but nothing is truly lost" 

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 11:58:35 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: Re: RoM/Terran TL

Leroy writes
>I did the same analysis and it is a 3:1 advantage, which is
>significant.

Just out of curiosity - how did you do this analysis?

>Just for averages, assume that the entire nine sectors of the Sphere
>are twice as populous as the average Third Imperial sector (which the
>sector data do not bear out).  That makes the Sphere about equal in
>population, hence production, as the Third Imperium.

>Then, the Imperium _still_ has a 3:1 advantage over the Solomani, and
>I:E states that the Imperium was _prepared_ for the conflict having
>reinforced the border.

First, it's only a 3:1 advantage if you assume that *all* the imperial forces
are TL-15, which they certainly aren't; the imperium had *just barely*
started to transition to TL-15. 

I say again: if the Imperium had significant quantities of TL-15 troops, they
would have appeared in Invasion: Earth. No matter what was going on elsewhere,
invading Earth was the single most important land battle the Imperium was
going to fight in the Rim War. If they had TL-15 troops, they would have
included *some* of them there. Similarly, if Earth was TL-15, *some* of its
home defence troops would have been TL-15, and been present. 

Second - even if the Imperium had a 3:1 effective advantage, they couldn't 
deploy *everything* to the Rim; they had to keep enough forces present 
to deter the Zhodani, the Aslan, the Vargr, the K'Kree...and this was the
period of the "crustal" Imperial strategy, where most forces were 
forward-deployed. 

Finally - the Imperium having a significant (perhaps 2:1) advantage is
perfectly consistent with the results to the war; the Imperium was on the
offensive - and you need an advantage to win if you're on the offensive; they
captured large amounts of territory (but not all they wanted), which is
basically consistent with the Imperium being slightly but not very much stronger
than the Solomani.

I notice you haven't addressed the absence of other TL-15 Solomani worlds in
1110 - did they absent-mindedly leave all their technological information 
on Sol while they were busy evacuating all their TL-15 troops to avoid
confusing future archeologists?

I admire your tenacity, Leroy...but try applying Occam's razor: in the
complete absence of TL-15 counters in I:E, the best explanation is that
neither side had significant TL-15 forces anywhere, not that they magically
shuffled all of them off. If nearly the whole Solomani Sphere in 1110 is
TL-14, the best explanation is that they were all TL-14 in 1000, not that 
they mysteriously slipped back.

Even *you* have to admit that the Imperium is ahead of the Sphere technologically
in 1100.l Why can't you admit that the same is true in 1000?

Bruce

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 19:11:38 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: Grid for Combat (was Re: Yet another of the MULTITUDE of Requests to Marc)

On Wed, 20 Aug 1997 23:50:36 -0800, Peter Newman wrote:

> Now I happen to think GW's games are a bit pricy but I would love to see
> something similar for Traveller.  Tabletop Minis games are very visual
> and look cool.  This would help in marketing Traveller.  I think that a
> tabletop game with half a dozen Imperial Marines in TL15 Powered Battle
> Dress against a dozen TL 14 Zhodhani Consular Guard teleport specialists
> with combat armor (T4's unpowered Battle Dress would be fun to play and
> great to get people into Traveller.  I suspect it would be a wee bit
> expensive to develop but we can dream.  I see a point based system for
> assembling balanced forces and a new Army Codex (er Alien Forces Guide)
> every few months or so.  The boxed game would be $70 or so & feature the
> Imperial Marines vs Zhodhani mentioned above.  (I picked Zhodhani
> because they have a good visual look and their psionic powers would make
> for an interesting game but if we want this to be a Milieu 0 game I
> guess we would have to pick someone else.)  Naturally this game would be
> supported by lots of pretty looking expensive 28mm pewter miniatures.

The problem with this is that GW has already established itself as the
reigning champion of tabletop games.  GW sells more tabletop games
than all of the miniature system companies *combined*.  Like
Microsoft, this kind of leverage has made it extremely difficult for
any other company to produce a competitive product.  Whether you like
GW games or not (I do not-- they often boil down to matches involving
one set of bizarre unit-specific rules pitted against another) it will
be extremely difficult to succeed in this market.


James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 15:40:58 -0400 (EDT)
From: XatoKuom@aol.com
Subject: Re: LaGrange Points

In a message dated 97-08-21 15:03:24 EDT, Glenn Hoppe wrote:

<< 
 I hope I got the above right, I cribbed parts from some Astronomy notes
 on the web...
  >>

Cool!  

Thanks for the info.  Can you or anyone else recommend a reasonable
astronomical or astrophysical text for reference?  I understand the basics of
the math required, up to and including diff. eqs, but would prefer something
slightly more palatable.

Thanks again!!!

Scott Quigg(XatoKuom@aol.com)

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 17:39:00 -0400
From: Bill Prankard <BPRANKARD@theiia.org>
Subject: Re: Silly Question

>Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 01:52:44 -0400
>From: "Michael D. Peters" <Letterworks@Comten.com>
>Subject: Silly question

>This is sort of in relation to the Ahhhhggg thread currently going on
>but enough off of the subject that I'm posting it as a new tittle.

>How may people on the List actually play out ship to ship combat during
>role play sessions?

I actualy do play out the ship to ship combat durings sessions.  It has 
gotten a bit easier in T4 than in TNE which took all night!(look to see what 
direction the ship is facing, roll on the location table, roll for system 
hit, apply dammage, etc....) The RPSC System workds great for me.  For 
gaming puropses it is quick and details the RP aspects of ship combat.  I 
have used it many times and I can actualy visualise what each PC is doing, 
 like something out of a Star Trek scene:

Joe Ishugii wrenched the controls on the bridge of his Scout-Courier, 
managing to anticipate the pirate ship's laser blast and evade it, just 
barely.(Player rolled his pilot evasion task)  His friend, Schmedly Dunlop, 
manned the Gunnery Control station.  "I'll soon deal with this problem!", 
said Schmedly as he got a lock on the pirate.(sensor task) and fired.  The 
small laser turet on the Scout was working overtime(overpower laser ROF), 
and was prone to overheating, but he managed to peal off a good shot that 
lased right into the pirate ship's main gun, damaging it severely(successful 
gunnery task) just as the electronics spark and fry in the turret.(Unknown 
to players at that moment).  Just then the sesors detect 2 inbound bogies 
goming in fast from the pirate, missiles!  Shmedly prepares to get a lock on 
and fire at the missiles when he gets a red light indicating the laser 
turret is off line.  "Motz!  We need laser power in the next 30 miniutes or 
were all dead!", screams Schmedly to the engineer.  Motz gets to work 
re-rigging the power couplings and circuitry,  he finishes and Schmedly 
manages to get a shot off to the inbounds, destroying one....the other 
impacts into the hull.  The guys on the bridge rock in thier chairs as the 
missile hits.  Dammage report computer says exposive decompresion in main 
engineering.  Motz learns this and realises if he haven't had been working 
on the laser turet on the time, he would be floating space junk by now!

Yes, ship combat need not be booring and "techish" you can have alot of fun 
with it.  The emphasis is to make shure it is done quick and fast so that 
the players get a feeling of heart pounding, gut wrenching, combat action. 
 This is what I liked about the CT/HG system.  MT made it very complicated 
with all those charts, TNE was detailed, too detailed.  RSPC is the best 
system I found yet. IMNSHO. :)

I do have to admit (not easy for a gearhead wargamer like m'self) but there 
is more you can do with a ship than just vape other ships.  Murder mysteries 
were a common and favorite occurance during that long week in jumpace in my 
games.  There's always the ship that has a 'quirky' piece of machinery. 
Ain't nothing like a quirky j-drive to act as your macguffin, PC's need to 
go to X world to get Y part or keep misjumping every 1 outa 6 jumps! ;->

Not to mention if you are playing in TNE land theres always....
VIRUS!
(The Commander ducks!)

   

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 14:48:49 -0600
From: lguatney@carbon.cudenver.edu (Leroy William Lu Guatney)
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

Way Back On Wed, 20 Aug 1997 11:04:05 -0400 (EDT)
Marc Miller <CardSharks@aol.com> writes:
>
>So here are the objections to the T4 / T41 Task system
>
>1. It uses the half die.
>
>2. Tasks are too easy.
>
>3. Tasks use full strength Char and Full Strength Skill in the task statement
>(corollary: skills are unqually represented compared to characteristics).
>
>Without discussion or elaboration of these points, I invite simple 1-sentence
         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>additions to this list so it can continue to be discussed.
>
>Marc

Friends, I got the impression that the last paragraph up there meant,

    "was there anything else?".


Communicatingly,


Leroy Guatney - lwlg@usa.net
 University of Mars, NorthAm Campus
 Class of '98

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 13:54:56 -0700
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

Well, what bugs _me_ the most is that it uses different
numbers of dice.

_______________________________________________________________
DSummers@Mail.ARC.NASA.gov

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 13:59:24 -0700
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1687

Fri, 15 Aug 1997 10:47:06 GMT, aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phil McGregor)
>And the Vilani have *some* germs ... even if only the e coli and the
>like in their gut.

Right, and bacteria are fairly adaptable to basic chemistry.  That
is why one should invoke just viral plagues.

______________________________
summers@alum.mit.edu

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 13:56:49 -0700
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1690

At 10:44 AM 8/14/97 +0000, Phil McGregor wrote:
>So, we drop the Flu on a typical high-tech Vilani world with 2 Billion
>people and kill 20 million. A public health disaster, but not one
>likely to cause societal breakdown!

Deaths are not likely to be the most significant event.  You have
a highly regimented empire that is spread out over travel
times on the order of a year and has gotten sort of moribund
lately.  Then you incapacitated more than 1/2 the population
(either through direct illness or caring for those who are
sick) for several months in several waves (for different
illnesses) that sweeps through the empire, disrupting
communications and supplies (what's the saying "any society
is only 3 meals away from revolution? :-) just as the war
is starting.  That would leave the empire ripe for the picking
from even a small force.  Especially, if regional governors,
smaller neighbors, etc.  used the opportunity to pick old scores,
declare independence, launch their own bids for power, etc.

You are a governor of a planet in an empire that has been
on it's last legs for some time now.  A couple of plagues
sweep through cutting you off.  A fleet shows up that, while
small by standards of the forces of the whole empire, is
certainly bigger than what you have, or can be raised without
the no longer existant communications, and comes from a society
that isn't disrupted by the plagues.  It is not unreasonable
that you probably would choose to switch to new masters who
can stablize the existing order.  In fact, they might
even be seen as a relief from anarchy.

_______________________________________________________________
DSummers@Mail.ARC.NASA.gov

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 17:03:42 -0400
From: "Glenn Crawford" <glennc@nelvana.com>
Subject: E21 a la Marcus

The last state, who knows.  I was thinking in terms of Guam, but it could
easily be Canadian or Mexican Border states.  Also, the Bahamas or the
Virgin Islands are not out of the question.
Fair. One minor detail, Canada has 10 provinces and 2 territories, and all
but four are on the US border (without looking, name them)  

> As an aside note, a lot of the 3rd world entrance is a bit unreal, but I'm
trying to get as
> many nations involved to increase the possibilities for the second half of
the century
I know that. In fact, I assumed it because, let's face it, Cuba is not going
to be anything soon if the sitrep remains as is.

> I haven't forgoten.  I chose Chile to be the core nation for SAFTA.
Sounds fair'nuf

>Intended as a regional power only.  They can't be ignored when dealing
> with the region since they could cause trouble.
Yep. They can do that

> How about the corporate states?
I've always thought corps won't rule but rather abuse laws in "pisspot"
nations like Liberia and threaten legit nation states. Corps cannot defeat
even a small nation state, but they can threaten to leave and thus
intimidate nation states. Perhaps you should make a list of good, average
and mean-spirited megacorps

> All right.  I'll continue with the regional breakdowns.  Anyone interested
in setting up population and 
> economic figures?
I'll take Central and South America (for $300 Alex)

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 18:02:00 -0400
From: Bill Prankard <BPRANKARD@theiia.org>
Subject: Re: FF&S2 Double Chapters & IG Bashing

>Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 09:48:53 -0500
>From: Sam Thomas <sinbad@dfw.net>
>Subject: FFS2 Double Chapters

>For those of you who are going to purchase FFS2, make sure you check out
>the pages and chapters.

>Commander X's copy has several chapters printed twice, and is missiong the
>staships section because of it.
>- -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
>(c)1997 Sam Thomas  |Email:sinbad@dfw.net|
>Sinbad Sam, Owner and Operator of Sinbad Sam's Saloon
>Chief Weapons Designer For Reddkneck Arms and Munitions

Yes, it's true.  In the copy I bought at my FLGS Chapters 6,7 & 8 were 
ommited and replaced with a duplicate of chapters 3-5 or such.

I do not know if anyone else had this misprint, and if not then that means 
my copy is RARE and perhaps valuable. :)

<RANT>
Yes, TML citizens, I am NOT looking at this incident negatively.  I think 
that this book absolutely rocks.  Sure my copy was messed up, and sure the 
tables are in the back, and sure the equations are kinda wierd, but the guys 
who worked on this thing went through a lot to produce it, and I respect 
that.  I am not saying this because I was a playtester either.  I have 
started to get into the game design thing on a freelance level and I can 
only imagine what some of these guys who do it for a living have to deal 
with, in addition to maintaining a job and for some a family, they do not 
need negative comment.

There, I have said my peace.
</RANT>

What I am saying is, this is a game, have fun with it.  I kinda enjoy little 
quirks like this.  Prolly because I look at things in the future (hey I'm a 
dreamer).  I figure my copy of FF&S II could be an envy of gamers in the 
next century (Wow, you got one of those copies?  Way cool!)

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 97 08:44:58 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

On 08/17/97 at 09:02 AM,  "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
said:


>>  If this becomes the case, I would
>> *prefer* that the skills achieved these levels without using a multiplier
>> (ie KB2), might or might not be possible, but I would prefer it, and what
>> this means for skills is that 1 is a beginner, perhaps 6 is professional,
>> and 9 is an expert.

>Right.  I'm taking the opposite side.  

I know you are, Ken. ;->  This is one we simply diagree on.  It is possible
(easy even) to extend the level of skills somewhat beyond the 1-6, and, to
me, that does less damage to the Traveller system than trying to shoehorn
everything into 1-6.  Yes, I know about the compatability ?problems?, but
all those old rules need to be revisited, reviewed and revised (where
needed) anyway. So, let's worry about making it better, not keeping it they
same.

>but I'd like to keep Traveller skill levels like they were  in CT and MT. 
>I don't want another animal like TNE where skills are  on a different
>scale.

Well, if skills run 1 to 6 and characteristics run 2 to 12 like in CT/MT
then they *don't* work on the same scale. In TNE skills ran from 1 to (I
never saw higher than 10) and attributes ran from 1 to 13, the scales were
closer to being the same. Personally, I liked the TNE *scales* and it's
task system, although I think the "number of dice/diff level" is a *neater*
technique and I'd like to see it retained, if possible.

There are a number of reasons I would like skills and characteristics to
run on about the same scale.  One being you could more easily have
characteristic only tasks, (STR+AGL) rather than (STR+skill), when they are
appropriate.  

I guess this issue isn't one worth arguing between us, we both know our
attitudes on it pretty well by now, and aren't likely to change each other.


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

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 16:56:18 -0500
From: Sam Thomas <sinbad@dfw.net>
Subject: RAAM Torpedoes Bubba and Little Bubba

ATTENTION!!ATTENTION!!ATTENTION!!ATTENTION!!ATTENTION!!ATTENTION!!

Reddkneck Arms and Munitions (RAAM) is proud to announce a great line of
missiles/torpedoes to carry the RAAMPage Weapon Modules.

Due a great effort on our part and CRASH we were able to get this
announcement to every freedom loving being out there. All major instellar
governments have been trying to suppress this from getting out to beings
out there.

Well they did not succeed, hell they did not even scuff the paint job.<G>

We here at RAAM are proud as hell, to formally announce the release for
sale of our line of torpedoes/missiles "Bubba" and "Little Bubba". 

With the armor level that each carries they will shake off point defense
batteries like water on good wax job.

Each is capable of multiple runs at more than one target, too.

They designed to reusable to keep costs down.

We have even packaged them into two major variants. 
The MK1 line for the "Cannonites" out there and the MK2 line for the
"Herectics".

"Bubba" and "Little Bubba" are guaranteed to make your enemies into new
allies or space dust, your choice.

They have been designed by the very best techniques and technologies
available and even some not generally available.

We were able to find solutions to the many issues in the design and
construction of the "Bubba" and "Little Bubba".

Easy credit and financing available, we accept valuable metals, credits,
and lost kittens.

Remember at Reddkneck Arms and Munitions (RAAM) if its a big battleship
RAMM it. 

Our motto is "Peace Through Superior Massive Overkill"

Reddkneck Arms and Munitions (RAAM) is located at Liberty Hall/Beyond, go
past the Spinward Marches, and just follow the glowing planets and cratered
starships. 

And now for the MK1 lines of "Bubba" and "Little Bubba"
- ---------------------------------------------------------
TL15 Bubba Class Missile/Torpedo Mk1			
Displacement:  10( USP7)	 	
Volume:        140		
Configuration: Cylinder Streamlined		
Dimensions:    12.8m Long x 3.7m High x 3.7m Wide (approximate)		
Structure Material: TL 13 Electropolymorphic Synthetics		
Chassis:  12g Rated		
Armor: 28cm TL13  Electropolymorphic Synthetics		
Armor Rating:		 	 
Facing  Slope  Armor Value	
Front   None      48	
Right   None      48	
Left    None      48	
Rear    None      48	
Top               48	
Bottom            48	
Stealth: Y
Primary Power Plant:	TL 15 Fusion, 171.36Mw,Afterburner Level 5
Fuel Consumption: 0.2390625 Per 100 Hours
Fuel Carried: 3 Hours
Propulsion:  TL 11 Thruster Plates, 82.1Mw (3284 tons thrust)
Crew: None
Options: 
TL 15 Automated FC Computer Rating 3 Dedicated:Y Skill Level 8 DM 2
TL 15 Auto Pilot Computer Rating 3 Dedicated:Y Skill Level 9
TL 15 Engineering Computer Rating 3 Dedicated:Y Skill Level 8 DM 2
Commo: 
TL 15 Vehicle Mil-Spec Far Orbital Laser Comm, Channels 15
TL 15 Vehicle Mil-Spec Far Orbital Maser Comm, Channels 15
Sensors:	
Lidar:   TL 15  Mil-Spec Far Orbital Lidar, Multiple Array
Optical: TL 15  Mil-Spec Far Orbital Optical, Multiple Array
Jammers	
Lidar:   TL 15  Mil-Spec Far Orbital Lidar Jammer
Optical: TL 15  Mil-Spec Far Orbital Optical Jammer				
Perfomance(loaded) 
       acceleration after gravity 12G, top speed 10819m/turn				
(Driver only)	
       acceleration after gravity 12G, top speed 10819m/turn				
Agility: -9DM to be hit				
Endurance: 3 Hours at Max Speed				
Chance of Being Detected: DM -3, Optically DM:-5				
                                # Of               Total 
           Warhead  # of        Warheads   	   Number of
RAAMPage   Size     RAAM Packs  Per Pack  Damage   Warheads
Module 1   50t      3           1260	 241      3,780
Module 2   1t       2           272243    102      544,486
Module 3   Bigshot  1           1260      Special  1,814,953
Smart Coating: Y				
Black Hole:    Y				
Cost(Cr): 151,446,620				
Total Mass: 285.1				

TL15 Little Bubba Class Missile/Torpedo MK1					
Displacement: 10(USP6)	 			
Volume: 140				
Configuration: Cylinder Streamlined				
Dimensions: 12.8m Long x 3.7m High x 3.7m Wide (approximate)				
Structure Material: TL 13 Electropolymorphic Synthetics				
Chassis: 16g Rated				
Armor: 11.5cm TL13  Electropolymorphic Synthetics				
Armor Rating:		 	 
Facing  Slope    Armor Value			
Front   Radical    45			
Right   Moderate   41			
Left    Moderate   41			
Rear    None       36			
Top                36			
Bottom             36			
Stealth: Y				
Primary Power Plant:TL 15 Fusion,161.28Mw,Afterburner Level 5				
Fuel Consumption: 0.15 Per 100 Hours				
Fuel Carried: 2 Hours				
Propulsion: TL 11 Thruster Plates, 62.2Mw (2488 tons thrust)				
Crew: None				
Options: 
TL 15 Automated FC Computer Rating 3 Dedicated:Y Skill Level 8 DM 2
TL 15 Auto Pilot Computer Rating 3 Dedicated:Y Skill Level 9
TL 15 Engineering Computer Rating 3 Dedicated:Y Skill Level 8 DM 2			
Commo: 
TL 15 Vehicle Mil-Spec Far Orbital Laser Comm, Channels 15
TL 15 Vehicle Mil-Spec Far Orbital Maser Comm, Channels 15
Sensors:	
Lidar:   TL 15  Mil-Spec Far Orbital Lidar, Multiple Array
Optical: TL 15  Mil-Spec Far Orbital Optical, Multiple Array
Jammers	
Lidar:   TL 15  Mil-Spec Far Orbital Lidar Jammer
Optical: TL 15  Mil-Spec Far Orbital Optical Jammer	
Perfomance(loaded)	
 acceleration after gravity 16G, top speed 24117m/turn				
(Driver only)	
 acceleration after gravity 16G, top speed 24117m/turn				
Agility: -14DM to be hit				
Endurance: 2 Hours at Max Speed				
Chance of Being Detected: DM -3, Optically DM:-5				
                                # Of               Total 
           Warhead  # of        Warheads   	   Number of
RAAMPage   Size     RAAM Packs  Per Pack  Damage   Warheads
Module 1    50t      1          106       241      106
Module 2    1t       1          23015     102      23,015
Module 3    1t       1          23015     102      23,015
Smart Coating: Y				
Black Hole: Y				
Cost(Cr): 102,448,198				
Total Mass: 160.5				

And now for the MK2 lines of "Bubba" and "Little Bubba"
- ---------------------------------------------------------
TL15 Bubba Class Missile/Torpedo MK2					
Displacement: 10(USP7)	 			
Volume:  140				
Configuration: Cylinder Streamlined				
Dimensions: 12.8m Long x 3.7m High x 3.7m Wide (approximate)				
Structure Material: TL 13 Electropolymorphic Synthetics				
Chassis: 30g Rated				
Armor: 24.5cm TL13 Electropolymorphic Synthetics				
Armor Rating:		 	 
Facing  Slope    Armor Value						
Front   None      46.0			
Right   None      46.0			
Left    None      46.0			
Rear    None      46.0			
Top               46.0			
Bottom            46.0			
Stealth: Y
Primary Power Plant:	TL 15 Fusion, 129.024Mw, Afterburner Level 6
Fuel Consumption: 0.45 Per 100 Hours
Fuel Carried: 3 Hours
Propulsion: TL 15 Thruster Plates, 52.35Mw (6980 tons thrust)
Crew: None
Options: 
TL 15 Automated FC Computer Rating 3 Dedicated:Y Skill Level 8 DM 2
TL 15 Auto Pilot Computer Rating 3 Dedicated:Y Skill Level 9
TL 15 Engineering Computer Rating 3 Dedicated:Y Skill Level 8 DM 2			
Commo: 
TL 15 Vehicle Mil-Spec Far Orbital Laser Comm, Channels 15
TL 15 Vehicle Mil-Spec Far Orbital Maser Comm, Channels 15
Sensors:	
Lidar:   TL 15  Mil-Spec Far Orbital Lidar, Multiple Array
Optical: TL 15  Mil-Spec Far Orbital Optical, Multiple Array
Jammers	
Lidar:   TL 15  Mil-Spec Far Orbital Lidar Jammer
Optical: TL 15  Mil-Spec Far Orbital Optical Jammer					
Perfomance(loaded)	
 acceleration after gravity 30G, top speed 24791m/turn				
(Driver only)	
 acceleration after gravity 30G, top speed 24791m/turn				
Agility: -27DM to be hit				
Endurance: 3 Hours at Max Speed				
Chance of Being Detected: DM-3, Optically DM:-5				
                                  # Of               Total 
             Warhead  # of        Warheads   	     Number of
RAAMPage     Size     RAAM Packs  Per Pack  Damage   Warheads
Module One   50t      1           1,260     241      1,260
Module Two   1t       3           272,243   102      816,729
Module Three BigShot  8           153,438   Special  1,227,504
Smart Coating: Y				
Black Hole: Y				
Cost(Cr): 138,135,444				
Total Mass: 234.2	

TL15 Little Bubba Class Missile/Torpedo MK2					
Displacement: 10(USP6)	 			
Volume: 140				
Configuration: Cylinder Streamlined				
Dimensions: 12.8m Long x 3.7m High x 3.7m Wide (approximate)				
Structure Material: TL 13 Electropolymorphic Synthetics				
Chassis: 3.6g Rated				
Armor: 14.3cm TL13 Electropolymorphic Synthetics				
Armor Rating:		 	 
Facing  Slope    Armor Value		
Front   Radical    48			
Right   Moderate   44			
Left    Moderate   44			
Rear    None       39			
Top                39			
Bottom             39			
Stealth: Y				
Primary Power Plant:	TL 15 Fusion,100.8Mw,Afterburner Level 6				
Fuel Consumption: 0.3515625 Per 100 Hours				
Fuel Carried:	3 Hours				
Propulsion: TL 15 Thruster Plates, 35.4Mw(4720 tons thrust)				
Crew: None				
Options: 
TL 15 Automated FC Computer Rating 3 Dedicated:Y Skill Level 8 DM 2
TL 15 Auto Pilot Computer Rating 3 Dedicated:Y Skill Level 9
TL 15 Engineering Computer Rating 3 Dedicated:Y Skill Level 8 DM 2			
Commo: 
TL 15 Vehicle Mil-Spec Far Orbital Laser Comm, Channels 15
TL 15 Vehicle Mil-Spec Far Orbital Maser Comm, Channels 15
Sensors:	
Lidar:   TL 15  Mil-Spec Far Orbital Lidar, Multiple Array
Optical: TL 15  Mil-Spec Far Orbital Optical, Multiple Array
Jammers	
Lidar:   TL 15  Mil-Spec Far Orbital Lidar Jammer
Optical: TL 15  Mil-Spec Far Orbital Optical Jammer						
Perfomance(loaded)	
 acceleration after gravity 36G, top speed 40988m/turn				
(Driver only)	
 acceleration after gravity 36G, top speed 40988m/turn				
Agility: -34DM to be hit				
Endurance: 3 Hours at Max Speed				
Chance of Being Detected: DM -3, Optically DM:-5				
                                  # Of               Total 
             Warhead  # of        Warheads   	     Number of
RAAMPage     Size     RAAM Packs  Per Pack  Damage   Warheads
Module One   50t      1           106       241      106
Module Two   1t       1           23,015    102      23,015
Module Three BigShot  1           153,438   Special  153,438
Smart Coating:Y				
Black Hole: Y				
Cost(Cr): 103,421,003				
Total Mass: 133				
			


- -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
(c)1997 Sam Thomas  |Email:sinbad@dfw.net|
Sinbad Sam, Owner and Operator of Sinbad Sam's Saloon 
Chief Weapons Designer For Reddkneck Arms and Munitions
- -----------------------------------------------------

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1727
***********************************
Traveller-digest      Friday, August 22 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1728



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Event Horizon
Re: LaGrange Points
Re: Brokers
Re: 1/2 die.
T41 Skills Draft F Fighting
Marc's post.
Re: FF&S2 Double Chapters & IG Bashing
Re: Task Resolution
Re: Early Charges?
Re: Task Resolution
Re: Silly question
Re: Bashing is Poor Form
GI Joe Bashing
Re: FF&S2 Double Chapters & IG Bashing
Virus is here!
Re: Early Charges?
Re: How Big is Your Starport?
Re: Task Resolution
Mee-too, dee-too, and wounds (was RE: Task Resolution)

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 14:57:31 -0700
From: kenji@accessone.com (Kenji Schwarz)
Subject: Re: Event Horizon

James Lindsay goaded me on:

>Great review, Kenji.  Could you please go and see Mimic when it comes
>out this weekend?  We could all use your valuable insight into yet
>another (potentially bad) SF movie :P

They're ALL being very bad little SF movies -- very bad indeed -- and they
must be punished.  Oh yes.  Oh yes.

Kenji Schwarz
kenji@accessone.com

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 15:13:27 -0700 (PDT)
From: Craig Berry <cberry@cinenet.net>
Subject: Re: LaGrange Points

> Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 12:04:03 -0400 (EDT)
> From: XatoKuom@aol.com
> 
> I believe the LaGrange points are located at the points in space where the
> gravitational forces are next to zero.  That is the point between the Earth
> and the Moon when the gravitational attraction is equal from both sources.

Not quite correct.  The L points are where the gravitational and
*centripetal* forces in the rotating two-body frame cancel out.

Picture the Earth-Moon system as seen from 'above' their center of mass
(inside Earth, by the way).  The two bodies revolve continuously around
this common point, once per month.

Now, start spinning yourself, at the same rate, so that from your view,
Earth and Moon are 'fixed in place', with the whole rest of the Universe
spinning around them once per month.  In this frame, gravitational forces
act as they always do, pulling objects toward Earth and Moon.  However,
there is also a new 'pseudoforce' in this frame, which 'pushes' objects
away from the center of mass, more so the further they are from it.

Near Earth or Moon, the attractive forces overwhelm the repulsive
'pseudoforce'.  Far from the two, repulsion overwhelms attraction.
However, in a few special places, the two neatly cancel out, and these are
the LaGrange points.

The first three, L1-L3, are along the line running through the Earth and
Moon; one 'behind' Earth relative to the moon, one between Earth and Moon,
and one 'beyond' the Moon.  These are all 'negatively stable', however,
like a ball bearing balanced on a smooth hill.  If the ball bearing drifts
even slightly off-center, it will accelerate away, down the hill.
Similarly, a craft wishing to stay at L1,2 or 3 must use a tiny amount of
thrust to stay there, as otherwise tiny external forces -- solar gravity,
light pressure -- will shove it away.

The last two LaGrange points are at the apices of equilateral triangles
having Earth and Moon at the other two apices; 60 degrees ahead of and
behind the Moon in its orbit.  L4 and L5 are *positively* stable, like a
ball bearing sitting in a shallow dip.  Nudge the ball bearing gently
enough, and it will tend to roll back to its original position.

This positive stability is one major reason L4 and L5 make attractive
spots for large-scale space facilities; you don't need (much)
station-keeping fuel to make stuff stay where it's supposed to be.

Hope this helps!

- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
   |   Craig Berry - cberry@cinenet.net
 --*--    Home Page: http://www.cinenet.net/users/cberry/home.html
   |      Member of The HTML Writers Guild: http://www.hwg.org/   
       "Every man and every woman is a star."

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 97 17:12:07 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: Brokers

On 08/21/97 at 03:18 PM,  Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior) said:

>Assuming that average skill levels in T4.1 will be higher, the broker
>tables _do_ need changing.  How about replacing the straight +Broker
>modifier with a task roll?

>To influence the final sale price:
>Opposed, Broker, Int (or Cha if using this characteristics)
>Referee: This is an opposed task between buyer and seller. The winner can
>adjust the roll on the actual value table in their favour by +/- the
>following amount: Marginal Success, +1; Success, +2; Exceptional Success,
>+3; Outstanding Success, +4.

Best idea on this subject yet!  I've been trying to convert as many of the
tables and "Roll 7+" type things to Tasks as I can in my notes. What's the
point of having a good task system if we don't put it to use? ;->

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

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 97 17:19:51 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: 1/2 die.

On 08/21/97 at 08:30 AM,  "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net> said:

>Folks, it seems that Marc is committed to the half die, lets focus on
>making sure that what he gives us to review is gone over in a complete and
>detailed manner, and let's get out there and start writing support
>materials.  We keep asking for more proofreading, we now have that chance
>with T4.1

Doug, I'm not arguing with you or Marc about the 1/2 die. I've said I don't
like it, Marc has made it fairly clear he wants to use it, so unless he is
open to dropping it why discuss it?  However, I'm also not going to use it
in Task Resolution. I can see it's uses in certain areas of character
generation and the combat system, but a single d3 in the middle of a d6
progression is inelegant and unneeded.

Of course, just my opinion.

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

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 97 22:47:00 GMT 
From: s.johnson107@genie.com
Subject: T41 Skills Draft F Fighting

On Wed, 20 Aug 1997 17:25:54,  CardSharks@aol.com Wrote...

> Brawling encompasses unarmed, unstructured hand-to-hand combat.
> Melee is structured hand-to-hand combat (boxing, wrestling,
> martial arts). Environmental Combat involves fighting in High G
> or Zero-G, or special situations (such as underwater).
    Okay, I'll probably end up detailing it more for my own satisfaction, but I
can live with this.

Stephen

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 00:36:44 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Marc's post.

Marc,

Apologies if people are ****ing you off with moaning. You probably only see
it as people love the game so much. Personally, I've just adopted the
principle of looking at the supplements first, and then buying them if I
like them. (Caveat Emptor?) I like the T4 system, and am looking forward to
T4.1.

Just one plea - please leave the combat system substantially as it is, as
it is one of the bits in the new rules that I think beats any previous
edition's. (Nice, fast, task driven and with autofire rules that are
understandable and playable! ;-) ) Haven't used the unarmed combat yet, so
I won't comment.

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"Omnia Mutantur Nihil Interit"  -  Sandman 'The Wake'
"Everything Changes, but nothing is truly lost" 

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 16:43:22 -0700
From: scharlto@ifsna.com
Subject: Re: FF&S2 Double Chapters & IG Bashing

Commander X said:
>Yes, it's true.  In the copy I bought at my FLGS Chapters 6,7 & 8 were
ommited and replaced
>with a duplicate of chapters 3-5 or such.
>
>I do not know if anyone else had this misprint, and if not then that means
my copy is RARE and perhaps valuable. :)
>

I suspect this is a rarity; I have my pre-order copy of FF&S, and I've
looked at the local game store, and both copies are whole and unsullied
with pagination aberrations.  As for collectibility; its always possible.
I have some 12" GI Joe accessory sets that were mispackaged, which I hope
someday might be worth something (as opposed to the other sets which I've
long since opened and played with).

Yeah, I said I played with them...

Whats it to you?  You got some kinda problem with that?

Yeah, I'm 33.  What's your point?

You talkin to me!?

I don't see nobody else here, you must be talkin to me!

Steve Charlton
Feeling slightly reactive today...


Just leave my GI Joes alone!

Grrrrr....

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 23:07:21 +0000 ()
From: kraehe@bakunin.hb.north.de (Michael Koehne)
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

Moin Glenn Hoppe,

> Descriptions something like:
> 
> Skill-1     Novice. Basic familiarity with the application of the skill.
>             Normally, professional employment not possible.
> 
> Skill-2     Trained. Minimum level for professional employment.
>             Character is still considered a beginner.

	is ok

> Skill-4     Proficient. Character is considered competant in his craft.
>             Most professionally employed people using this skill possess
>             this skill level.

	shoul be level 3

> Skill-6     Expert. Character is an expert in her field. She commands a 
>             higher wage when professionally employed for her skill.

	should be level 4

> Skill-8     Master. Those possessing this skill level consistantly
> outperform
>             most others with the skill. Those seeking only the best hire
>             these people.


	should be level 5

> Skill-10    Virtuoso. Character known to be the at the top of the field,
>             perhaps even becoming famous. Realm of the Einsteins,
> Trumps,
>             Pavarottis, Scottys, Van Goughs...

	should be level 6 and maximum.


- -- 
	kraehe@bakunin.north.de		human.is-bremen.de/~kraehe/traveller
		  " ceterum censeo MSDOS esse delendam "

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 22:00:31 +0000 ()
From: kraehe@bakunin.hb.north.de (Michael Koehne)
Subject: Re: Early Charges?

Moin Marc,

> But I'm really tired of the Imperium bashing that the net and the TML seems
> to love to do.

	Its usual in the net that good stuff is just stored silently,
	while bad thinks are flamed by everybody. 

> Where would we be if Imperium had not stepped forward? While meaning no
> criticism of other operations at all (indeed, Tantalus sponsors this mailing
> list), we would be where 2300 AD is... not in print.

	As a book importer there is a difference whether something
	is "out of print - canceled " or "not yet published - recorded".
	That Traveller is in print but "temporary out of stock -
	order backordered" was your and IG's great work.

	If we would charge credit cards for NYPs, we would be out
	of bussines. Tell your management to charge cards the day of
	delivery, when no other terms are made like "30 days strictly
	net" for book and gamestores, or "proforma prepaid" for the
	wilds.

	To have a living Traveller is a very good thing for all of us.
	It would be bad if this phoenix dies because of unprofessional
	management. 

By Michael

PS : I'm programer of "Missing Link" a german book importer.
- -- 
	kraehe@bakunin.north.de		human.is-bremen.de/~kraehe/traveller
		  " ceterum censeo MSDOS esse delendam "

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

Date: 22 Aug 1997 00:08:25 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

>I have no love of the multiplier, but in my book it beats having a 
>whole new definition of skill levels.

I disagree with Kenneth here.  I'd rather have a new set of skill levels
(with a table/formula so I could convert exisitng characters) and not have to
multiply during the game.  Less hassle for newcomers.  

As someone who regularly introduces people to Traveller (by using it as a
teaching aid), I know that it is easier to premultiply numbers than to keep
multiplying them every time you use them.

This is not a total opposition to multipliers.  I can see, for example,
having a character multiply their skill by half when using unfamiliar
equipment.  I just think that the multiplier should be for special cases, not
all cases.

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 22:54:44 +0000 ()
From: kraehe@bakunin.hb.north.de (Michael Koehne)
Subject: Re: Silly question

Moin Michael D. Peters,

> How may people on the List actually play out ship to ship combat during
> role play sessions?

	I often do it. Here is my "role playing ship combat system"

	- BE PREPARED !
	- Place a map of the ship on the table. The map has to have
	  grids. I also prepare a d20 translation for the deckplans
	  as I'm using TNE hit locations. Any player has to place his
	  poeppel somewhere on the map.
	- Place a clock next to the map. I always referee ship combats
	  in REAL TIME. Civilian laser fire every 3 minutes,
	  military lasers any 30 seconds.
	- Anything on the player ship is task based now. There is NO
	  HEXMAP for the combat. I'm using a pocket calculator for
	  astrogation (Atari Portfolio) and as the LCD has a very
	  narrow engle of view, there is no posibility to lurk. I
	  dislike a referees screen hiding me from the players, so
	  if you dont use a pocket calculator be shure that the
	  screen is between the paperwork and the players, and not
	  between the players and you.
	- All space tasks are UNCERTAIN. Uncertain princip and real
	  time produces a very dense athmosphere. I let the sensor
	  op make his roll, if it was successfull I divide his roll
	  by the modified target number multiply it by 30 minutes,
	  and tell him later (portfolio manage this beeping up with
	  a message ;-), if it was a miss, the task fail without
	  any notice. I dont tell players if they hit. The sensor
	  op has to roll on. Its difficult to tell if a hit was
	  placed and formidable to distinct between sandcasters,
	  decoys and fuel hits.
	- Never extend a battle for more than 5 turns (2,5 hours),
	  preparing jump is a matter of less than an hour or imposible
	  by rule. So disengaging is most times posible in long
	  range battles. If the group manage to stay alive for
	  that time cheat the moral roll and disengage.

By Michael
- -- 
	kraehe@bakunin.north.de		human.is-bremen.de/~kraehe/traveller
		  " ceterum censeo MSDOS esse delendam "

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 20:04:51 -0500
From: Alex Ingram <ingram@airmail.net>
Subject: Re: Bashing is Poor Form

Robert Eaglestone wrote:
> 
> I and the rest of the Traveller group here in Richardson,
> Texas, think Marc Miller made the right choice with
> Imperium Games.  Regular, monthly supplements plus an
> early game rules release is good marketing.  Exposure and
> care+feeding is what will make Traveller grow.
> 
> Face it folks.  Marc has created a workable universe
> based primarily on his background and the help of capable
> people.  He's fed my imagination for 20 years.  So, he
> seems like a capable captain for his game.
> 
> Conclusion: constructive support seems to be called for,
> as well as patience and flexibility.
> 
> Corollary: whatever Marc comes out with, I'll go along with.
> If I don't want a supplement, I won't buy it.  But the core
> rules are good as I see them, and the background has always
> been the 3rd Imperium.
> 
> I'm buying T4.1.  Can I submit an order ahead of time?
> 
> Rob

I'm also in Richardson, Texas and have been into Traveller since 1977.
I've been interested in starting up a game in the Dallas area. I operate
a graphic design business from my home and generally work between 4 pm
and 4 am daily. So, give me a call and let's see if we are on the same
wavelength.

Alex Ingram
540 Buckingham Road #1133
Richardson, Texas 75081
(972) 783-4575
ingram@airmail.net

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 97 20:35:26 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: GI Joe Bashing

On 08/21/97 at 04:43 PM,  scharlto@ifsna.com said:

>I have some 12" GI Joe accessory sets that were mispackaged, which I hope
>someday might be worth something (as opposed to the other sets which I've
>long since opened and played with).

>Yeah, I said I played with them...

That's what I thought you said.

>Whats it to you?  You got some kinda problem with that?

Nope, I've always prefered the "little green army men" myself.

They are having a "Barbie Roleplaying Game" discussion over on
rec.frg.grups that you might want to join in.  GI Joe and
Barbie...shopping! It's not a hobby it's a WAR! ;->

Eris

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

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 22:53:54 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: Re: FF&S2 Double Chapters & IG Bashing

Bill Prankard writes:

>Yes, it's true.  In the copy I bought at my FLGS Chapters 6,7 & 8 were 
>ommited and replaced with a duplicate of chapters 3-5 or such.
>
>I do not know if anyone else had this misprint, and if not then that means 
>my copy is RARE and perhaps valuable. :)
>

   I'm not sure how rare or how valuable, but my understanding is that
when things like this happen, it is the fault of the printer, not the
publisher (in this case IG).  I seriously doubt IG leafed through every
single copy of FF&S II before shipment (nor would I expect them to do
so).

>What I am saying is, this is a game, have fun with it.  I kinda enjoy little 
>quirks like this.  Prolly because I look at things in the future (hey I'm a 
>dreamer).  I figure my copy of FF&S II could be an envy of gamers in the 
>next century (Wow, you got one of those copies?  Way cool!)

   Little "quirks" like this do nothing for MMT's repuation and are, I'm
sure, regretable from IG's perspective.  Hopefully their printer can
avoid similiar manufacture of "collectables" in the future.

Regards,

Harold

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 22:28:14 -0700
From: David Smart <dsmart@flash.net>
Subject: Virus is here!

The following virus description was taken from McAfee's
Website. And some of you scoff at TNE's Virus. HA! I _knew_ it
was true! It's even spelled correctly! "All fighters accelerate
to 9Gs and prepare to Jump. Engage the Vampires as you bear!"
(They're everywhere! They're everywhere! 'pant' 'pant')


Traveller

Virus Characteristics
- ---------------------
Traveller is a memory resident, file infecting virus. It infects
.COM and .EXE files, including COMMAND.COM. 

Upon infection, the Traveller virus becomes memory resident at
the top of system memory but below the 640K DOS boundary.
Interrupt 21 is hooked by the virus in high system memory, as
well as interrupt 24 in low system memory. Interrupt 12's return
is not moved. 

Once memory resident, it infects .COM and .EXE files as they are
executed. It also infects one file each time a previously infected
file is executed, or whenever a DOS DIR command is issued.

It is not known what Traveller does besides replicate. 

Indications of Infection
- ------------------------
Files infected with Traveller will contain the following text
strings:
"Traveller (C) BUPT 1991.4"
"Don't panic I'm harmless <<---!!!!!!!"
"*.* COMEXE" 

Total system and available free memory decreases by 1,840 bytes.
Files infected with Traveller have a file length increase of
1,220 to 1,237 bytes. The virus is located at the end of the
infected file. There are no changes to the file's date and time
in a DOS disk directory listing.

Method of Infection
- -------------------
The only way to infect a computer with a file infecting virus is
to execute an infected file on the computer. The infected file
may come from a multitude of sources including: floppy diskettes,
downloads through an online service, network, etc. Once the
infected file is executed, the virus may activate. 

REMOVAL

How To Clean Your System With VirusScan
- ---------------------------------------
If the above method was unable to remove the virus or the file
was corrupted or overwritten by the virus, please refer to:
If VirusScan Cannot Remove a Virus From Infected Files

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

Prevention
- ----------
Scan all files before using them to minimize the risk of
infection. 

Virus Information
- -----------------
Discovery Date         November, 1991
Origin                 United States
Length                 1,220-1,237 Bytes
Type                   File Infector
                       Memory Resident
Prevalence:            Rare

Variants
- --------
Traveller-B
Traveller-C
Traveller-C2
Traveller-C3

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 23:33:39 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: Re: Early Charges?

Marc Miller writes:

>> I thought that the UPS strike started 2 August...that is over 2 weeks 
>> after I was charged.  Before I go to the BBB I was wondering if 
>> anyone else experience this?
>
>Too many people shoot from the hip on this stuff. Imperium told you an answer
>(delay due to UPS). Sure, they ordered the color printer before the strike,
>and it hadn't come by the time of the strike, and now its delayed.

   My credentials as a critic of IG are well...without question, but I
think if you go to the BBB or any other consumer watchdog group without
first expressing your issues to IG, you are doing IG a disservice and
basically wasting your time.

   Give them a chance to make things right.  The *vast* majority of
businesses out there will be all too happy to make things right, and
sometimes even give you something extra for your trouble.  If you go
straight to the BBB, probably the first thing they are going to ask you
is, "what did IG say when you tried to contact them?"  If your answer
is, "I haven't tried," you can expect to be told to at least make an
effort and then get back with them.

>But I'm really tired of the Imperium bashing that the net and the TML seems
>to love to do.

   I think if there is valid criticism of product or the way IG does
business or approaches the game, then this is as good a forum as any
available.  It should remain so (sometimes a little theraputic ranting
is good for the soul).  IG shouldn't worry about people here griping
about various products.  What they *should* worry about is if a product
is released and nothing is said about it at all.  For the bandwidth
coming out of TML is the sound of people who care about Traveller.  When
that bandwidth ceases, it is a sign that no one cares.

   However, lenghty rants against FF&S II (which should scream GEARHEAD
PRODUCT from the word 'go') that put the product down because it is
'gearhead-oriented' are uncalled for.  If you think that FF&S I was a
much better product, if you think the formatting sucked with the tables
in the back, if a formula is confusing, missing, or appears to be
incorrect, if you feel it should have covered more areas of technology
and it did not, or you don't like certain passages or artwork, then
those are valid criticisms.  But please, enough of the "it's too hard"
comments! 

>There are things I wish were different. I am personally revising T4 into T41
>(and many don't agree with my decisions, but I promise you it will be worth
>the wait). Many people are participating in the revamp of T4 and in the
>publication of the upcoming T4 products.

   Everyone does.  I think what you are doing in personally revising the
MMT rules was a excellent move.  Even MMT serious skeptics have backed
off to varying degrees the "T4 Bashing"--some have even announced their
intention of giving MMT another chance.  If IG had carried out the
revisions I don't think any of the skeptics would have given a second
thought to pronouncing it "dead on arrival."

>I spoke some time ago with one of my former partners and he talked about how
>genteel and understanding everyone on his particular mailing list was... why
>aren't we at that point too?

   How many versions of the game system are there for the game covered
in the other mailing list?  Assuming at least four, are they all
basically covering the same ground or do they each have radically
different settings?  Are the game mechanics similar (use the same amount
and type of dice, etc.)?  Because of the inherant differences between
CT, MT, TNE and MMT, it is only natural that there be a certain level of
tension, ranting, and general strife on this mailing list.

   God help us when SJG comes out with GURPS Trveller....

Regards,

Harold

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 00:09:51 -0400 (EDT)
From: XatoKuom@aol.com
Subject: Re: How Big is Your Starport?

In a message dated 97-08-21 17:46:07 EDT, John Wood wrote:

<< 
 Not being up on military matters - how much does the presence of a naval
 base affect the size of civilian ports in RL?  Personally I'd give it a
 +1 at most, but am willing to stand corrected.
  >>

I would think that the presence of a Naval Base would have quite a large
impact.  Let's say that a Cruron is based out of the system.  That's 5
cruisers(30,000-50,000dt), 4 escorts(10,000-25,000dt) and various other
ships.  There's also the support personnel to think about, say another 100%.
 Now we have to consider the civilian sector.  Does the planet have
recreation facilities for the 20,000+ Naval personnel; if so add at least
50,000 more people who are directly influenced by the single cruron's
presence.  Then there's the black market to consider........

All in all, a relatively small naval force requires a huge amount of civilian
support thus increasing the size and complexity of the spaceport.

Whew.....Let's keep this thread a brewin'

Scott Quigg(XatoKuom@aol.com)

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 00:11:33 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

In a message dated 97-08-21 21:29:04 EDT, you write:

<< > Descriptions something like:
 >=20
 > Skill-1     Novice. Basic familiarity with the application of the skil=
l.
 >             Normally, professional employment not possible.
 >=20
 > Skill-2     Trained. Minimum level for professional employment.
 >             Character is still considered a beginner.
>>

After doing aptitudes for Education and careers for CharGen, the followin=
g
seems a natural extension...

Competency Testing
	A candidate for a position must demonstrate that he or she can succeed at
various tasks associated with the position. average tasks at the 90 th
percentile. To accomplish this, the sum of skill level and one of the
associated characteristics must equal 10 or more.

Position	Prime Skill	(Char)	Req S+C	Collateral Skills
Captain			=85=09
Pilot	Pilot	(Int, Edu)	10=09

etc.

That means that those operating a starship will usually get things right.= But
you have to have the skill (Default-0 plus half Characteristic puts success
at less than 10, or the 90th percentile). Of course, if the Astrogator dies
and your character has Astro-1 and Edu-7, they might let you do the job (does
anyone remember Starman Jones? (obscure literary reference).

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 23:07:59 -0500
From: David Reed <david@techrefuge.com>
Subject: Mee-too, dee-too, and wounds (was RE: Task Resolution)

In the spirit of the lack of netiquette that's been going round, I'll "me-too" 
here.

On Thursday, August 21, 1997 7:08 PM, Rob Prior wrote:
> >I have no love of the multiplier, but in my book it beats having a
> >whole new definition of skill levels.
>
> I disagree with Kenneth here.  I'd rather have a new set of skill levels
> (with a table/formula so I could convert exisitng characters) and not have to
> multiply during the game.  Less hassle for newcomers.

And us old fogies...  (And what's this Microsoft-esque demand for backward 
compatibility anyway?  ;-)  Anybody else got to M$'s WorldWideLive today?

> As someone who regularly introduces people to Traveller (by using it as a
> teaching aid), I know that it is easier to premultiply numbers than to keep
> multiplying them every time you use them.

Or every time you're shot, splashed by a psion, or dropped on your head.  Okay, 
that tears it: my ONE big beef with Traveller, CT/MT, is the deduction of 
wounds from stats.  Arrrgh!  Sorry, I just *hate* that.  How 'bout life levels 
or somethin'...  Sorry, I meant to not propose a lame fix.

> This is not a total opposition to multipliers.  I can see, for example,
> having a character multiply their skill by half when using unfamiliar
> equipment.  I just think that the multiplier should be for special cases, not
> all cases.

Consider this a total opposition to multipliers.  Take no prisoners.
_________________________________________________________________

David Reed            "We have a saying: 'If you're not confused,
                         then you don't know what's going on...'"
david@techrefuge.com            -Frankie McGuire from Devil's Own

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1728
***********************************
Traveller-digest      Friday, August 22 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1729



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

I'm a gear-head, and I'm proud!
Re: Brokers
Re: Early Charges?
Re: Brokers
Re: Marc's post.
Re: Second careers
Metator Update
Re: alternate tech discussion
Re: Task Resolution
RE: Max skill level
Re: Brokers
T4.1 Chargen & Skills
T4.1 Skills, Craftsman
RE: Task Resolution
FFS2--T4--README
Re: Task Resolution
Re:  Grid for Combat 
Re: History skill

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 00:17:59 -0400
From: Mark Urbin <eclipse@ultranet.com>
Subject: I'm a gear-head, and I'm proud!

I repeat, I'm a gear-head, and I'm proud.  I've been gaming for just about
20 years now.  Fire Fusion & Steel is one of the best gaming supplements
ever produced.  I did some of the pre-release rule testing as part of the
beta-group.  

I used to produce small arms, starships, airships, trucks, and air-craft.
All with a .5mm pencil, a pocket calculator (square root being the most
complex function available), and an engineering notebook.

Members of my gaming group produced solar sail racing yachts, grav
vehicles, and a really nifty scattergun sidearm (Darrian Naval issue).  To
be honest, some members looked at the formulas and shuddered.  It's not for
everyone.

Yah, it had limitations (rotorcraft were oversized, smallarms got too heavy
too fast), but it allowed us a *lot* of flexability.  

Today there are vastly simplified systems that used tables generated from
FF&S that speed up the design systems.  Saves you from having to figure out
just what that square root key on your calculator is for too.

Dip me in crank case oil.  I'm a gear-head, and I'm proud of it.


- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
eclipse@ultranet.com -- These opinions are mine, no one else wants `em.
It was a typical net.exercise -- a screaming mob pounding on a greasy spot 
on the pavement, where used to lie the carcass of a dead horse.
                 http://www.ultranet.com/~eclipse/
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 00:27:11 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Brokers

In a message dated 97-08-21 21:13:51 EDT, you write:

<< Problem: If skill levels are supposed to range from 0 to 15 in T4.1 (to put
 them on par with stats), then a professional level in a skill ought to be
 6+. There would be almost no professionals with Broker-1.  >>

In CT, characters received one skill per term, plus one for commission or
promotion. The average skill eligibility was between 0.25 and 0.50 per ye=
ar.

In Mercenary (and High Guard, etc), there were a variable number of skills
awarded ranging, but let's say it was between 1  and 1.25 per skills per
year.

MT continued that general eligibility.

T4 and specifically T41 has a skill eligibility of approximately 1.25 skills
per year. That rate is formalized by the "experience" rate after adventuring
begins.

The rate of receipt of skills by characters in T41 is approximately the same
as for Mercenary or Enhanced MT characters.

Empirical evidence from playtesting of T41 indicates that most character have
skill levels between 2 and 4 for the skills that they figure are important.

It is a mistake to say specifically that CT skills ranged from 1 to 6 and T4
(T41) skills range from 1 to 15. Skills in CT could range from 1 to 15 as
well.

The characteristics versus skill debate could range on forever. T41 is going
to have characteristics and skills.

Looking deeper into the details of Skill + Characteristic, we come upon
Competency testing... actually looking at how well a specific character can
perform specific tasks...

Competency Testing
A candidate for a position must demonstrate that he or she can succeed at
various tasks associated with the position. average tasks at the 90 th
percentile. To accomplish this, the sum of skill level and one of the
associated characteristics must equal 10 or more.

Position	Prime Skill	(Char)	Req S+C	Collateral Skills
Captain			=85=09
Pilot	Pilot	(Int, Edu)	10=09

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 00:35:36 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Early Charges?

In a message dated 97-08-21 07:29:43 EDT, you write:

<<By the way, I've caught some of the new skills - I'm going to have to go 
 back over my archives to pull 'em all out! >>

By posting what I put together for T4 (as I finish up each entry) and by
posting CharGen and Tasks, I want to include the mailing list on what is
coming out before it gets to print. For comments, etc. and to help me make
the final text as good as possible.

Marc

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 00:35:37 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Brokers

In a message dated 97-08-21 07:30:16 EDT, you write:

<<How about the following:
 
 Broker  Starport        Mod     Comm
 Broker-8        A       +4      20%
 Broker-6        AB      +3      15%
 Broker-4        ABC     +2      10%
 Broker-2        ABCD    +1       5%  >>

Thanks. I have implemented the shift in skill level.

Marc

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 00:35:38 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Marc's post.

In a message dated 97-08-21 21:47:11 EDT, you write:

<< 
 Just one plea - please leave the combat system substantially as it is, as
 it is one of the bits in the new rules that I think beats any previous
 edition's. (Nice, fast, task driven and with autofire rules that are
 understandable and playable! ;-) ) Haven't used the unarmed combat yet, so
 I won't comment.
  >>

The problem is they are task driven, but the exposition really doesn't
specify the tasks. I want it to be task driven, but I want the tasks and task
format to be explicit.

Marc

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 00:35:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Second careers

In a message dated 97-08-21 08:43:42 EDT, you write:

<<I don't understand why you wan't to discourage players from generating
 characters with multiple careers. Why is that? >>

Because people skip from career to career vicariously adventuring int he
pre-generation process prior to starting to adventure. CharGen is not
intended as a substitute for adventuring; its a way of getting some
experience before adventuring.

Because once multiple careers are allowed, then it becomes more than two...
it becomes 3 or 4 or 5. I have to draw the line somewhere, and I originally
drew it at 1. I let Vargr have two. I foolishly let an editor talk me into
allowing multiple for T4, and I regret it.

Marc

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

Date: 22 Aug 1997 04:10:53 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Metator Update

I've uploaded a slightly more recent version of Metator (v1.0.4d, up from
v1.0.3d).  This is what happens when I can't mow the lawn because it's
raining :-)

This version has some slight changes, mainly to the displays.  For example,
the 100-diameter limit around a star now displays correctly on the system
chart.  As well, I entered a few more magnitude numbers (but some stars still
display incorrectly).

The next incremental release will slightly change the data file structure, so
don't save any really important worlds in this version!  I am adding
geological tables - such as earthquake frequency - and will need to expand
the basic world record.  (I ran out of reserved space last upgrade.)


Oh yes, the URL:
http://www.interlog.com/~dmci104/GamingClub/Traveller/software.html


Please send me feedback.

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 22:22:14 -0800
From: Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca>
Subject: Re: alternate tech discussion

>Perhaps my point would be better made to suggest we consider
>the next cutting edge tech to come along rather than forcing
>the RoM to use old 80x86's cannibalized from IBM PCs.  (A TL 7
>RoM).

What about power, control, and logic devices using photonic (optical
devices controlling pulses of light), gravitic (employing solid-state
matricies of gravitic potentials), or nucleonic (microscopic machines using
tghe strong nuclear force) technology? These technologies could have
significantly greater bandwidth, power, and reliability than electronic
technology. I think AT&T has experimented with photonic devices.

NB. Fiber optics are not photonic devices; they are merely a transport
mechanism. The power and logic is supplied by familiar old electrons.

- --
Richard Hough
rdhough@orca.bc.ca

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

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 22:24:55 -0800
From: Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

>> 3. Tasks use full strength Char and Full Strength Skill in the task
>> statement (corollary: skills are unqually represented compared to
>> characteristics).
>
>Yes, this is a *very* big problem.  I still don't like the idea that an
>Stat 11 Skill 1 doctor is more capable than a Stat 7 skill 4 doctor.

This depends on what a skill level means. If skills go from 1 to 6 then,
yes, a skill 4 doctor should be an expert and able to beat a skill 1 doctor
of any characteristic. If skills go from 1 to 15, like characteristics,
then a skill 4 isn't greatly better than a skill 1 and I could easily see a
skill 4 doctor being bested by a talented skill 1 doctor.

Personally, I like the idea of skills based on the same scale as
characteristics. Like Eris says, this means that we could have skill-only
(Chemistry+Medical for pharmacy, for example) or characteristic-only
(Dex+Int for a pool shot) tasks.

- --
Richard Hough
rdhough@orca.bc.ca

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 02:04:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: pawn@CAM.ORG (Glenn Grant)
Subject: RE: Max skill level

I said,

>> While we're on the topic, *is* there a maximum skill level in T4.1? The
>> draft I've got doesn't mention one.

David Reed replied:

>There should be...  What was wrong with INT+EDU is maximum "efficient" (on
>tap) 
>skill memory?

That applied to maximum total number of skill levels per character. I was
asking whether there was a limit to how many levels you can have in a given
skill.

I think 15 is a sensible limit, since stats are also capped at 15.

+ GMG +

    -----------------------Glenn Grant-----------------------  
                         <pawn@cam.org>
    Web: <http://helios.physics.utoronto.ca:8080/ggrant.html>
"Nature abhors normality. It can't go too long without a mutant."
                        --Dr Blockhead

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 02:03:53 -0400 (EDT)
From: pawn@CAM.ORG (Glenn Grant)
Subject: Re: Brokers

I wrote:
>
>> Marc said:
>> 
>> >Brokers can influence consultations of the Actual Value Table, but must be
>> >paid a commission. Brokers, however, vary in quality and availability by
>> >starport.
>> >
>> >Broker  Starport        Mod     Comm
>> >Broker-4        A       +4      20%
>> >Broker-3        AB      +3      15%
>> >Broker-2        ABC     +2      10%
>> >Broker-1        ABCD    +1        5%
>
>> Problem: If skill levels are supposed to range from 0 to 15 in T4.1 (to put
>> them on par with stats), then a professional level in a skill ought to be
>> 6+. There would be almost no professionals with Broker-1.
[snip]

Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net> suggests:

>How about the following:
>
>Broker  Starport        Mod     Comm
>Broker-8        A       +4      20%
>Broker-6        AB      +3      15%
>Broker-4        ABC     +2      10%
>Broker-2        ABCD    +1       5%

Sure, that would work. Inelegantly, though.

I feel that every level of a skill should count. The best solution would be
to rework the Actual Value Table mentioned by Marc, so that the modifier
equals the skill level, as it should.

Glenn

    -----------------------Glenn Grant-----------------------  
                         <pawn@cam.org>
    Web: <http://helios.physics.utoronto.ca:8080/ggrant.html>
"Nature abhors normality. It can't go too long without a mutant."
                        --Dr Blockhead

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 02:04:15 -0400 (EDT)
From: pawn@CAM.ORG (Glenn Grant)
Subject: T4.1 Chargen & Skills

Marc,

More thoughts on the Chargen draft chapter:

Do graduates of the Merchant Academy enlist automatically in the Merchants?
The text doesn't say. If they do get to auto-enlist, at what rank do they
start?

In the Merchants, Automatic Skills include "Business-2" at rank 02. Does
this really mean you get two more skill levels from the Business cluster
automatically? Or is it a typo?

Under Scholars: on the Skill Eligibility table: "+1 skill upon achieving
Edu B". If you've already got Edu B upon enlistment, do you still get the
skill?

Re: the Art Skill description: I think Art should be a cascade skill. The
player should choose a specialty from a list of various fields of art, such
as Art: Graphics, which also provides a lesser ability in Art: 3-D. Thus:

Art (Cascade):  Includes:
  Graphics      Painting, Drawing, Graphic Design, Printmaking
  3-D           Sculpture, Ceramics, Textiles, Architecture, Holography
  Multimedia    Film, Video, Animation, Digital Media (TL6-8)
  Immersive     Digital Media (TL9+), VR, Holomedia, Sensies ('simstim')
        
Skill in one specialty confers abilities in other specialties at a lower
level of skill, usually 1 level lower, sometimes 2 or 3.

This way, the Art skill not only covers careers in painting, but also in
cinema, design, architecture, advanced media, and lots of other cool things
we haven't invented yet (but which crop up in sf stories all the time)...

Best,

 + GMG +

    -----------------------Glenn Grant-----------------------  
                         <pawn@cam.org>
    Web: <http://helios.physics.utoronto.ca:8080/ggrant.html>
"Nature abhors normality. It can't go too long without a mutant."
                        --Dr Blockhead

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 02:04:10 -0400 (EDT)
From: pawn@CAM.ORG (Glenn Grant)
Subject: T4.1 Skills, Craftsman

Marc,

[I'm not posting this to the list because I know it would just cause a
stupid flamewar...]

Can you rename "Craftsman" in T4.1? It rankles every time I read it. Many
of my characters are not men (sometimes not even human) so why use this
term when there are gender-free alternatives? (Imagine how you'd feel if
our cultural default concepts were reversed, and you were often called "a
great 'craftswoman' of game design"?)

Call it "Handicraft", "Craftwork", or "Fabrication". (Or "Craftsophont" for
that matter :)

Better yet, make "Handicraft" (or whatever) a cluster that breaks it down into:
        Carpentry  (or Woodcraft)
        Metalwork  (or Metalcraft)
        Synthetic Materials (or Plastics ?)
        Armorer
        Tailor
        Jeweler (maybe)
        Ceramics (maybe)
        Basket Weaving (okay, maybe not Basket Weaving:)

Fortunately you got rid of "Combat Rifleman". But don't worry, I'm not
going to complain that there's no "Jill of All Trades" skill...

While we're suggesting new skills, I'll repeat something I suggested during
the Task System Debate:

       Put "Sophontology" under the "Social Sciences" cluster.

The science of "Sophontology" is mentioned in the CT Library Data entry on
Sophonts (IIRC), and I prefer this term to the less precise "Xenology". I
think it's a highly necessary skill in the Traveller universe, representing
general knowledge of a specific alien culture, its customs, psychology,
etc.

The player must choose a specialization each time he rolls this skill, such
as "Sophontology: Aslan".

Sophontology might also cascade to Language, and vice versa. Hence,
Sophontology: Aslan-4 would also confer Language: Aslan-3. But Language:
Vargr-4 would confer Sophontology: Vargr-3.

What d'ya think?

More maunderings as they come to me...

Glenn
        

    -----------------------Glenn Grant-----------------------  
                         <pawn@cam.org>
    Web: <http://helios.physics.utoronto.ca:8080/ggrant.html>
"Nature abhors normality. It can't go too long without a mutant."
                        --Dr Blockhead

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 02:03:59 -0400 (EDT)
From: pawn@CAM.ORG (Glenn Grant)
Subject: RE: Task Resolution

>Marc elucidated:
>> So here are the objections to the T4 / T41 Task system
>>
>> 1. It uses the half die.

Not a big problem for me. I'd prefer to avoid it whenever possible, though.

>> 2. Tasks are too easy.

IIRC, you said that PCs with an "average" stat-7 and skill-3 should have a
50% chance of success at Formidable tasks. And the current T4.1 system
achieves this. I feel that this is too easy: Difficult tasks should 50% at
this skill+stat level, not Formidable. A straight 1D thru 6D progression
would achieve this.

But I'm much more worried about characters with high stats, who really have
things too easy in T4.1, as in T4. For instance, we were playing T4 as
written, and my character (a mostly non-technical archeologist) managed to
fix most of a ship's virtually-trashed systems single-handedly, armed only
with Engineering-1, simply because I had a EDU of F. The ref, Roderick,
kept throwing Staggering and Impossible tasks at me, but I made every roll
easily. This is, of course, absurd. 

This sort of problem should be less common in T4.1 because EDU levels
aren't so ridiculously pumped up. But it's still a danger wherever
characters have high stats, and I think a slightly tougher system will
avoid these situations. Hence my suggestion of a straight 1D thru 6D
difficulty progression.

>> 3. Tasks use full strength Char and Full Strength Skill in the task statement

This is good, and I like it. But it requires a Chargen system that produces
characters with _at least_ two or three specialty skills in the 6+ range.
For the most part, the system works very well, though at present a PC is
only likely to have one skill at that level. As I said in a previous post,
I think a bit of tweaking would help, such as ways for the player to
concentrate on developing those professional skills. Entertainers and
Scholars have such specialites already. The trick is to keep these rules
from being abused, leading to characters with stat-F, skill-15. The Scholar
and Entertainer specialization rules are pretty well designed in this
respect.

Kenneth, of course, would like to restrict skills to the same 1-4 range as
in CT/MT, and I understand his reasons. It would be nice to keep things
compatible with the old rule sets. Boosting the range of skills makes for
problems - hence my post about your Broker Skill table. But I suspect this
is no longer an option. You'd have to rewrite the T4.1 Chargen rules in
order to maintain CT skill levels, which would be a shame because the
system works very well as it is. So T4.1 skill levels are not equivalent to
CT skill levels, but is this such a terrible thing? I think we can simply
convert CT skills to T4.1 skills by multiplying by 2. Or maybe 3.

Gee, I guess I didn't manage to restrict my opinions to single-line points.
Oh well ;)

Glenn

    -----------------------Glenn Grant-----------------------  
                         <pawn@cam.org>
    Web: <http://helios.physics.utoronto.ca:8080/ggrant.html>
"Nature abhors normality. It can't go too long without a mutant."
                        --Dr Blockhead

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 01:20:30 -0500
From: "David Murray" <DRM13@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: FFS2--T4--README

 After catching up on the last 6 weeks of TML mail I have a few things I
have to get off my chest.

Some are bashing FFS2 at the top of their lungs, and others are raving about
it.  FFS2 is only one more way to create a rating (UCP) of a design.  It
also explains some of the reasons why things ARE and why things are NOT.

FFS2 does some things rather poorly and others it does rather well.  The
reason I will stick with it is the fact that I, me personally, can help
correct what's wrong.  With help from all of the GREAT people we have here
on TML (yes go ahead and pat yourselves on the back -- but just once).  This
is why T4 has not died yet.  If it wasn't for all of us, and this open
forum, IG would have been filling chapter 11 long ago (they still may?!?).
But its their, IG's, inconsistencies in published material that will be
their undoing.

I do not want to see Traveller go away.  New material is almost always good
even if it is bad material because it gets people to think, and that is what
a RPG is supposed to do.  We take the best of the worst and everything of
the best and use what we want.  Create what we don't have, and read
EVERYTHING in between.

In most of the mail I read I got a bad taste in my mouth, not from some of
the exciting things that are going on but all of the other stuff.  I think
most of us know by now that IG doesn't SEEM to listen, they might - on deaf
ears, to what we have been telling them.  So I will say it again for
clarity,  QUALITY, Q U A L I T Y, QQ  UU  AA  LL  II  TT  YY, over
EVERYTHING else (quantity / timeliness).

I was not happy about Mileu:0 nor am I with E21, but that is what is so
Great about Traveller.  I don't have to follow those lines (except to keep
up my archive for other uses).

Chew on this for a while.
Anybody else feel this way? About any of this?

"Good Morning, Dave"
                    HAL 9000
______________________________
Dave Murray
DRM13@worldnet.att.net

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

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 06:55:47 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

> >I have no love of the multiplier, but in my book it beats having a 
> >whole new definition of skill levels.
> 
> I disagree with Kenneth here.  I'd rather have a new set of skill levels
> (with a table/formula so I could convert exisitng characters) and not have to
> multiply during the game.  Less hassle for newcomers. 

It is not a hassle if you only do it once (the calculation) and leave 
it like that.

Ex--  Character has Dex-7 and Pistol-2.  He wants to fire his gun.

The multiplier for skills is 3, and we've already wrote on the 
character's sheet.  The line reads
             Skill/Level          Exp
             ------------         -----
             Pistol-2               6

Instead of the player adding 2+7=9 (in T4), the player adds 6+7=13.

It's not more hassle.  It is the same move, and it is only addition.


Kenneth.

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 00:22:40 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re:  Grid for Combat 

Hello,
>I would also like to see a grid system return.  I think it would be
>_vital_ that the scale used be the same used to _draw_ starship deck
>plans.

  Great point. See below for expansion.

>This might make it possible to make a tabletop miniatures combat game.

  Well, AHL, Snapshot, Striker (&2)...  Why not a T4 version?

>Now I happen to think GW's games are a bit pricy but I would love to see
>something similar for Traveller.  Tabletop Minis games are very visual
>and look cool.  This would help in marketing Traveller.  I think that a
....
>great to get people into Traveller.  I suspect it would be a wee bit
>expensive to develop but we can dream.  I see a point based system for

  Expense can be lower than you think. You can now buy white metal 15mm
figs for WW-II very cheaply, up to and including bags of four battle tanks,
for around $20 US (under $30 CDN). The original 15mm Trav figs were quite
good, as well. These also work straight onto the old maps (AHL, Snapshot,
various licensees, Asteroid, deckplans on magnified copies), and make for
smaller (and better ground-scaled) table-top battles. Vehicles are _much_
cheaper, and importers can supply 15mm figs from the UK.

  For those who must have 28+mm figs, try "Legions of Steel". They should
be cheaper than GW and more palatable to Traveller players, "realism"-wise.
        (www.hookup:net/~losglobl)

  Still, my preference would be for the re-release of the Ral Partha
traveller figs, with an expanded range of Aliens (more doggies and K'Kows).
      
        Yours truly,
                Steven Hudson,
                        Vancouver, British Columbia

The CT Creed: "There is no Game but Traveller, and High Guard is its' Product"

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 11:09:33 +0100
From: "Nick Munn" <N.S.Munn@sheffield.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: History skill

John_Wood@cbtsys.com

[agreement deleted -- typical TML, huh?]

Maybe your desire for a knowledge-related component of History could 
be satisfied by including the Archaeology skill you outline 
elsewhere.  (I am a little cynical about the knowledge element of 
history in RL; too many graduate students whose response to the 
question "What decade did you say your period was?" is "Oooh, I 
wouldn't say a whole decade!" rather than "Don't patronise me, I know 
more general history than you do, and you know it."  I am not an 
expert on the broad sweep of history, but worryingly neither are 
they.  Digression over, no offence intended.  Perhaps they're just 
nice people.)

>      However, I still balk at the analogy between psychology and
> history - it just doesn't stand up. I think history should remain a
> knowledge skill, so the recall historical analogy task is fine, but
> the manipulate government task is way off, and I think there are
> two good Traveller-based reasons for asserting this:

May I abuse snippage by inserting some positive Traveller reasons 
here first?

I think MT had a Psychohistory skill; certainly it had a Library Data 
entry for psychohistory (with a little note for referees as well).  
Psychohistory is in the public domain.

Given that the concept exists, it is not unreasonable for a title of 
"psychohistorian" to exist for an expert in History and Psychology.  
This doesn't make them another Hari Seldon, just a social 
psychologist.

> 1: Marc can correct me if I'm wrong, but the derivation of the
> psychohistory aspect of the traveller background - the psioncs
> suppressions - is Isaac Asimov's Foundation series. I cannot claim
> to have ever read these books (shame on me) but I have read that a
> psychohistorical manipulation forms the meta-plot of the series.
> Psychohistory in these books is a statistical and public relations
> based science, requiring access to vast amounts of census and
> other types of data and absoloute secrecy concerning the
> manipulation - or the experiment itself affects the outcome. I'd
> say this is a fairly good footing on which to keep psychohistory in
> Traveller - there is a world of difference between psychohistory
> defined thus, and the outcome of the machinations (albeit
> political) of a group of player characters.

I would agree entirely, but IMO the world of difference is a 
difference in scope, not in nature.  While Asimov's psychohistory can 
read trends thousands of years ahead and accurately predict 
strategies to alter the whole galaxy of inhabited worlds, it requires 
vast resources.  PCs won't have the influence to do this; what they 
will be able to do is apply the techniques locally.  I don't see 
psychohistory as being anything other than a fusion of psychological 
and historical techniques.

I am certainly not suggesting that the PCs be able to wield unholy 
power over sectors of Imperial space -- although if they want to try, 
bring on those magnificent Men In Battledress...

> 2: Psychohistory has a well established place in the traveller
> canon - the Hivers are masters of this science in the proud
> tradition of Niven's Pierson's Puppeteers. The fact that the 3I
> failed to manipulate it's population and the status of manipulation
> as the Hiver's very own analog of the star trigger (more subtle,
> though) is a good argument for confining psychohistory to the realm
> of government and other ultra-resourceful agencies. In other words,
> this is a technology beyond the abilities of the Imperium that
> serves to define the 'flavour' of a central; alien race, so making
> it a readily available ability under the history skill diverges
> from 'canon'.

I don't intend to undercut the Hivers -- well, not much, anyway.  I 
do want humans to have a chance to detect and counter Hiver 
manipulations, or engage in manipulations of their own like the 
Psionics Suppressions.  (Yes, I've heard it's all a Hiver plot.)
It's a tribute to the Hivers that they can manipulate humans at all, 
given that alienness of their thought processes.

The key difference between 3I humanity and Hivers is that while 
humans view manipulation as reprehensible (at least when it's applied 
to them) and to be concealed, the Hivers glory in it.  If PCs skip 
out to the 3I with the secret of the Star Trigger, the 3I is not 
going to be any more defined by it, nor are the Darrians less defined 
by it -- it's not their big secret, but it's a damned effective 
weapon that's now known to *work*.

> Of course, there's no reason why players cannot be caught up in a
> manipulation, but I'd say a project of this type is beyond the ken
> of a single individual or a handful of individuals. You'd get a
> damned good scenario or even campaign out of it though - the truth
> could rapidly get lost in a situation where shadowy figures pull
> strings behind the scenes, kinda like the X-Files meets traveller.

That's *exactly* the kind of thing I'd implement if the PCs ever took 
to this in a big way -- with or without something called 
"psychohistory" behind them.


Nick

Dr. Nick Munn, Dept. of Information Studies, University of Sheffield
Tel. (0)114 222 2673, email n.s.munn@sheffield.ac.uk

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1729
***********************************
Traveller-digest      Friday, August 22 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1730



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Second careers
Re: History skill
Re: Ships of the Interstellar Wars (HG)
"Duplicate" skills
Re: T4.1 Skills, Craftsman
Re:  Grid for Combat 
Heavy Water
Re: alternate tech discussion
Re: Ships of the Interstellar Wars (HG)
Re: History skill
Photonics (was Re: Alternate tech)
Re: Silly question
IW Tech Levels
Re: That DAMNED Half Die!
Re: Task Resolution
Re: Silly question
Re: Task Resolution
Re: Task Resolution
Re: Brawling vs Martial Arts skill
Re: Is the Kinunir a Cruiser?
Re: Bloodwell Incident.......and a few Questions

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 13:21:44 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Second careers

Marc Miller writes:
>>I don't understand why you wan't to discourage players from generating
>>characters with multiple careers. Why is that? 
>
>Because people skip from career to career vicariously adventuring in the
>pre-generation process prior to starting to adventure. 

It's true that Traveller character generation has always been a bit of a
game in itself. To me that has always seemed a bit of an added charm to
it. That's true even if you only go through one career. I don't agree
that that is a bad thing. 


>CharGen is not intended as a substitute for adventuring; its a way of 
>getting some experience before adventuring.

If people enjoy creating characters, what's the harm in that? I should think 
that would be a bonus.

As someone who has used a few simple rules of thumb to allow characters
with multiple careers ever since CT, I can tell you that it enhances the
resulting characters. Instead of players being able to assume that a
diplomat would under no circumstances know anything about demolitions 
you can have diplomats who have been marines and ex-merchant navy officers
and ex-criminal army privates and ex-doctor law enforcers. It works for me,
anyway. 

>Because once multiple careers are allowed, then it becomes more than two...
>it becomes 3 or 4 or 5. 

Sometimes, yes, but the aging rolls impose a natural limit to the number of
different careers anyone can pack into a lifetime. And a few sensible rules
prevent people from chopping and changing incessantly. For example, unless
a character has a skill useful to the new career at a reasonable level, the
character begins on the bottom of the ladder in the new career. Since high
rank is an advantage in several ways, excessive career changes are
discouraged. And, again, what is the problem with a character having 5
careers? 

>I have to draw the line somewhere, 

I don't see why a line is necessary. There is a natural limit build into
the system already (the 4 year term size (Though, actually, I myself some-
times let a character have half terms. With the appropiate cut in skills
recieved, of course)).


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 12:37:37 +0100
From: John_Wood@cbtsys.com
Subject: Re: History skill

Nick,
     some good points there on the History/Archaeology skill - I agree with
you that the difference between player character and society-wide
manipulations is one of scale.

There was no Psychohistory skill in MT but there was an extensive library
data entry - so again, you're right, it is in the public domain.

     I think that what I'm trying to get at is that psychohistory should be
a skill all of its own if it is available to players at all (or rather for
the first time) in Traveller. Let's leave the History skill as it has
always been defined in Traveller (I think it first appeared in MT) - that
is as a knowledge based skill. I don't think it's too pedantic to see that
historical knowledge of any degree and the Machiavellian know-how for
manipulating situations are two separate areas of endeavour for the average
player character. This is all just IMO of course, and I'm not really
interested in arguing the specifics of one or other skill among many, I'd
be interested to see how you'd define a separate psychohistory skill
though...

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 00:53:08 +1200
From: Andrew Moffatt-Vallance <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Ships of the Interstellar Wars (HG)

>Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 01:52:01 -0600
>From: lguatney@carbon.cudenver.edu (Leroy William Lu Guatney)
>Subject: <CT,MT> Vilani/Terran ships of the First Interstellar War

>I was just purusing the tables in HIGH GUARD (remember that in terms of
>ship design, especially at these TL, there is not much difference between
>CT and MT) and came up with the following:

This is a facinating post. Unfortunately you've made a small error in reading
the High Guard rules and ignored a very important factor regarding the Vilani
in the Interstellar Wars.

First the minor error. You've misread the rule regarding ship size and
computers. The rule state that a ship of a certain size requires a certain
model of computer as a minimum. At TL 9 the best computer you can build is a
Model/3, at TL 11 its a Model/5. Now a 5,000T ship requires a Model/3 and a
10,000T requires a Model/4; a 50,000T ship requires a Model/5 and a 100,000T
ship requires a Model/6. Therefore the Terrans can build any ship smaller than
10,000T and the Vilani any ship smaller than 100,000T.

However more importantly, the Terrans are not fighting the central Vilani
fleet, they are fighting the provincial governors fleet. In the game Imperium
which simulates the the Interstellar Wars we find that the provincial
governor is prohibited from building any ship larger than a light cruiser. So
the Terrans are not facing the largest ships the  Vilani can build. The
question here is how big is a Vilani light cruiser? If we assumes that Vilani
capital ships are around 60,000T to 80,000T and their heavy cruisers around
40,000T to 50,000T, I'd hazzard a guess that Vilani light cruisers are in the
20,000T to 30,000T range. This makes the Terrans and Vilani a much closer match
than pure TL analysis would indicate. At this size in HG the best weapons are
missile bays (fits with Vilani ships high missile factors in Imperium).

Now this gives an interesting possibility. In Imperium, Vilani ships are mostly
charecterised by high missile factors and Terran ships by high beam factors.
I'm not sure and I don't have time to do the design at the moment, but I
believe you can design a jump capable ship mounting a factor-B spinal PA at
tech level 9 under High Guard (at TL 9 a B PA masses 5000T plus 2000T power
plant and fuel). I think this can be made to fit in a 9,900T hull. To be sure,
its not a very good ship, but it can be done and would come as a suprise to the
Vilani who have only ever encountered opponents who have received their
technology and tactics from the Vilani themselves (a GIGO situation). Such a
hypothesis would go a long way towards explaining why the Terrans where able
to survive the First Interstellar War.

However, as a final proviso, all this is of course mute, as High Guard has long
been retired as the "offical" ship design system (despite that fact, I do love
it and will continue to use it)

/mode=humour
"QSDS, SSDS, FF&S2; piffle, in my day we used High Guard, crumpled fish'n'chip
paper and a burnt stick to write on it, you youn'uns just don't know when
you've got it good"

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

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

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 14:06:14 +0100
From: "Nick Munn" <N.S.Munn@sheffield.ac.uk>
Subject: "Duplicate" skills

One point no-one's mentioned yet is about skill equivalences.

I really hate it when I roll a character (CT) with Liason-3, Admin-2, 
Streetwise-1.  Since the Liason counts as Admin or Streetwise-2, 
these skills are "wasted".  Similarly with the Pilot-4, Ship's Boat-2 
character... a kind GM (ha!) would allow rerolls, anyone got a spare 
kind referee? 8-)

This is less of a problem in T4 in general and T4.1 in particular; 
for instance, Medical now provides a blanket First Aid-1, and there's 
no upper limit to skills.  However, I still propose:

If a character has Skill-n derived from another skill held 
(e.g. First Aid-1 from Medical-3) and receives an increase to the 
"derived" skill, then they are awarded Skill-(n+1).

The Medical-3 character awarded First Aid skill has an effective 
First Aid-1; she has First Aid-2 after the award.  Obviously spent 
some time in an ER.


Effects: no "useless" skills, more skill-2/3 rather than 1/2, pilots 
don't now dread Ship's Boat skill, etc.

Side effects: it's still better to get the major skill first and then 
levels in the minor, but you will never do worse than under the 
current system.

Counter arguments (include): It's sometimes interesting to roleplay a 
character with "useless" skills, as it gives them some history.  
"Darned right they were a useless outfit, gave me vacc suit training 
and first aid after all them years as a drop trooper medic!"

The major argument against is that ability to perform a task and the 
"proper" training are different things: derived skills simply aren't 
accredited, they're patchy.  My only reply to that is that they 
aren't treated as such in any form of Traveller.  A skill level is a 
skill level, in practice.

Oh, and I'd love to see the Naval Architect skill back 8-)

Nick


Dr. Nick Munn, Dept. of Information Studies, University of Sheffield
Tel. (0)114 222 2673, email n.s.munn@sheffield.ac.uk

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 07:11:45 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: T4.1 Skills, Craftsman

At 02:04 AM 8/22/97 -0400, Glenn wrote:
>Marc,
>
>[I'm not posting this to the list because I know it would just cause a
>stupid flamewar...]

Ooopss.......

Actually, I liked your ideas.

- --

+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~+
|  Douglas E. Berry                 dberry@hooked.net   |
|             http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/            |
|-------------------------------------------------------|
|      Storm the master marathon I'll fly through       |
|      By flash and thunder fire and I'll survive       |
| Then I'll defy the laws of nature and come out alive  |
|                         -Queen, "Seven Seas of Rhye"  |
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~+

  

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 07:09:22 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re:  Grid for Combat 

At 12:22 AM 8/22/97 -0700, you wrote:
>Hello,
>>I would also like to see a grid system return.  I think it would be
>>_vital_ that the scale used be the same used to _draw_ starship deck
>>plans.
>
>  Great point. See below for expansion.


Everybody I've heard from wants the grid back, but very few people can
agree on the size.  *Sigh* for the Tactical Action Combat System (TACS)
which is being written today, I'm going to put all the movement rules in
meters per 6 second turn.  That way, you can convert to whatever grid size
you wish.  Want 30 second turns and a 10m grid?  Simple; multipliy all AP
costs by 5.


- --
+------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry         dberry@hooked.net   |
| Gearhead & Planetologist, Traveller since 1977 |
|     Inquistor Magnus, Royal Commission for     |
|               Canon Correctness                |
|         http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|************************************************|
|  "To live effectively is to live with adequate |
|   information."           -Norbert Wiener      |
+------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 09:19:28 -0500 (CDT)
From: lee@uansv2.Vanderbilt.Edu (Mike Lee)
Subject: Heavy Water

Hi, everybody-

        I have a quick question- could someone please explain what "heavy
water" is and its function in atomic weapons production?  I seem to remember
this topic coming up in the past regarding the German WWII a-bomb program.
Any help you could offer would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks in advance, and everybody have a great weekend!

Mike Lee

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 08:00:37 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: Re: alternate tech discussion

On Thu, 21 Aug 1997, Richard Hough wrote:
 
> What about power, control, and logic devices using photonic (optical
> devices controlling pulses of light), gravitic (employing solid-state
> matricies of gravitic potentials), or nucleonic (microscopic machines using
> tghe strong nuclear force) technology? These technologies could have
> significantly greater bandwidth, power, and reliability than electronic
> technology. I think AT&T has experimented with photonic devices.

What do you think Fib computers are ? ;-)

yes Bell Labs...errr... _Lucent_ did/does (they nuke research programs
with distressing speed these days) have a number of hybrid and a few,
very simple fully optical devices. 'Nano' (more or less) mechanical
devices are in commercial use today...there is an LED Projector on the
market (TI I think) that uses an array of movable mirrors in a chip sized
package as part of the system. Pretty neat stuff.

Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 08:17:38 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Ships of the Interstellar Wars (HG)

At 12:53 AM 8/23/97 +1200, Andrew wrote:

>"QSDS, SSDS, FF&S2; piffle, in my day we used High Guard, crumpled
fish'n'chip
>paper and a burnt stick to write on it, you youn'uns just don't know when
>you've got it good"

High Guard?  My brother and I used to dream of having HG!  we used Book 2,
in base 7 maths, and we LIKED it!  These kids today, no respect for tradition!

- --
+------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry         dberry@hooked.net   |
| Gearhead & Planetologist, Traveller since 1977 |
|     Inquistor Magnus, Royal Commission for     |
|               Canon Correctness                |
|         http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|************************************************|
|  "To live effectively is to live with adequate |
|   information."           -Norbert Wiener      |
+------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 08:18:01 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: Re: History skill

On Fri, 22 Aug 1997, Nick Munn wrote:

> The key difference between 3I humanity and Hivers is that while 
> humans view manipulation as reprehensible (at least when it's applied 
> to them) and to be concealed, the Hivers glory in it.  If PCs skip 
> out to the 3I with the secret of the Star Trigger, the 3I is not 
> going to be any more defined by it, nor are the Darrians less defined 
> by it -- it's not their big secret, but it's a damned effective 
> weapon that's now known to *work*.

And why shouldn't the Hivers glory in it...it is, to them, the perfect
defensive weapon...they don't risk themselves physically, far fewer people
die than in wars, and it ends by your enemy _agreeing_ to do what you
want, _happily_. I think that the most widely known Hiver manipulation,
that of the K'Kree, is probably considered mostly a failure by the Hivers,
simply because it _is_ so well known, that they had to go to the lengths
they did, confronting the K'Kree, and basically threatening them by
revealing that they'd manipulated some K'Kree into eating meat.

With less fanatical subjects, like humans, it's likely that the fact that
they're being manipulated would never be known. They just think it Tastes
Great! Less Filling!

The last, for you people fortunate enough to not live in the States, was
the advertising slogan of a brand of watered down beer that is
spectacularly successful because, at least intil recenly, Americans had No
Taste! in beer.

This comes up because I just read a hilarious, highly educational book
called "Beer Blast: The Inside Story of the Brewing Industry's Battles for
Your Money" by Philip Van Munching (ex of Van Munching & Co, importers of
Heineken beer) It is a wickedly funny tale of the Beer industry's
marketing battles, mostly from the 70's to today, told by a veteran of the
marketing trenches. ISBN # 0-8129-6391-1 Times Books, 1997

It has LOTS of examples of failed 'psychohistory' (aka marketing). 

Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 16:37:32 +0000
From: "Martin F C Pickett" <ceemfcp@cee.hw.ac.uk>
Subject: Photonics (was Re: Alternate tech)

I would like to point out that any and all of the numbers I mention 
here are at best rough, and at worst total flights of fantasy.  Some 
of the confusion in my ramblings may be cleared up by a visit to some 
relevant research homepages, notably
http://www.phy.hw.ac.uk/

Alternatively, depending on what part of the company he works in, 
Andy Lilly of BITS and Nortel may be able to help.  You anywhere near 
the Optoelectronics group at Harlow, Andy?

Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca> wrote:
> What about power, control, and logic devices using photonic (optical
> devices controlling pulses of light), gravitic (employing solid-state
> matricies of gravitic potentials), or nucleonic (microscopic machines using
> tghe strong nuclear force) technology? These technologies could have
> significantly greater bandwidth, power, and reliability than electronic
> technology. I think AT&T has experimented with photonic devices.

AT&T has indeed, as have a number of other telecoms companies and 
universities worldwide - the japanese are very interested by the 
potential, and here at good old Heriot-Watt we produced the world's 
first optical 'computer' - actually a ring (made up of 4 spatial 
light modulators IIRC) making up a single (I think?) optical logic 
cell - processing speed 1 logical operation (AND, OR, NOT etc.) per 
clock cycle.  The machine was called O-CLIP (Optical Cellular Logic 
Image Processor I think).  

The problem with it was that it didn't scale very well - the second
version was supposed to use a 4x4 array of optical elements for
parallel processing, but the researchers found that thermal
transmission between the cells of the SLM arrays was such that the
design was unworkable.  They then went on to look for new materials
to use as SLM's, and I believe have now settled on SEED (Self 
Electro-optic Effect Device) materials for these in most 
applications. 

All-optical computers are at the moment a real blue-sky research 
item, the real money is going into optical interconnects for 
electronic processors, such as those I believe are used between 
processor boards in the later Cray machines (anyone have one handy to 
check?).  As a previous poster said, the propagation speed for 
(free-space) optical transmission is ~twice that of electrons in 
silicon, and photons don't have interference problems when you cross 
two beams.  That being the major obstacle to optical computer design 
- - how to get the photons to interact with each other to make a logic 
circuit.

Still, you do gain a remarkable amount of freedom by being able to 
make connections from your chips in the third dimension - just ask 
anyone connected with flip-chip bonding techniques - and that's just 
using ordinary electronic connections.  Hybrid optical/electronic 
devices have an incredible bandwidth - 5 years ago the BNR labs 
at Harlow had developed fibre/electronics transceiver devices with 
speeds at 700 Mbit/s per channel, and last year they reported the 
fabrication of a 12x2.5 Gbit/s receiver, aggregate capacity 30 
Gbit/s.  I'm sure research hasn't stopped there!

> NB. Fiber optics are not photonic devices; they are merely a transport
> mechanism. The power and logic is supplied by familiar old electrons.

Very true - in fact, the power for any 'optical' device is supplied 
by good old electrons (leaving aside chemical lasers as irrelevant to 
the point in hand).  If you are willing to neglect power supplies 
however, optical fibres can indeed be photonic devices - there are 
self-amplifying optical fibres being laid all over the world, a 
nifty example being BT's fibre optic switch at Galashiels about 40 
miles from where I sit, allowing simultaneous transmission of up to a 
million-ish telephone calls from Scotland to London.

Right, it's time I stopped writing this and go and do some work 
instead.

Martin
Martin Pickett 
ceemfcp@cee.hw.ac.uk
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are alive, well and living on Sylea 

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 11:42:53 -0400 (EDT)
From: SemoFetus@aol.com
Subject: Re: Silly question

>On a related note, why is it that there is not a comprehensive book on
>technology other than arms, armor, power plants, and vehicles (AAP&V)? FF&S
>only dabbled outside of these spheres, and the various item lists in books
>like MT's Imperial Encyclopedia are very limited and quite conservative in
>scope (at least that's how they seem to me).

You're not the only one who's noticeded that.  I, for one, agree entirely.  I
think that there should be a little more attention paid to the other
technologies of the Traveller universe (someone had mentioned a little while
ago that in his M:0 campaign the starships had low-tech, handcrafted accents
on the bridge and such.  It made me start thinking, and I got these visions
of starships fit for kings with Corinthian Leather and so on)...

Anyhow, I agree completely, and, I introduce the "Microfoil Welding System"
as a start on non-weapon tech:

     Microfoil Welding System, TL8+,  Mass: Neg., Vol: Neg. Cr: See below.

    Microfoils are a combination of various materials and metals (boron, carbon,
silica, aluminum, nickel) that releases can heat up enough to fuse two pieces of
metal together with just a spark or a small amount of heat.  The foil's rapid heating is
caused by the rapid combination of the atoms of the above materials.  The reaction
raises the temperature to 1,600 degrees celsius in less than a millisecond.
     Micorfoils create a stronger weld because there is little or no time for oxygen to
mingle with the joint and cause brittleness.  The strength of the weld can be changed
by adding or removing layers.  The thinner the layer, the stronger the weld.  Some
layers are just 20 - 25 atoms thick.
     Although the technology exists at TL8, it is not cost efficient to use.  The time
and cost required is excessive (8-24 hours per layer and an expensive technique
called "magnetron sputtering").  At TL10, advances in nanotechnology mean that
foils are cheaper and easier to make, and the cost goes down.  At TL10+ Micro-
foil welding systems cost 100 credits per "weld" whereas at TL8 and 9 the same
amount would cost 100 times as much.

(Note:  This technology was listed in the December 1996 issue of Scientific American)

Semo

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 10:54:28 -0500
From: "Andrew Akins" <igor@ames.net>
Subject: IW Tech Levels

 Not that I like contributing to these long discussions, but I stumbled upon
something today that might shed some light on the IW/ROM TL discussion.

In Challenge 28, the article Contact: Sabmiqys basically points out that the
Vilani did not have Meson weapons, but the Terrans developed them during the
war. A quote:

"The first time the Vilani encountered meson fire from the Solomani, the
Vilani were horrified - their ship was induced to explode from inside - just
like the Gashukubi legends. Rumors of the "gashukubi" weapon of the Solomani
did much to break the Vilani's will to continue the fight."

Gashukubi ("Certain Death") was the Vilani name for the Sabmiqys' system.

This article seems to say that the Vilani lacked both Meson weapons and
meson screens.

If I'm stating something that has already been said, I apologize.

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

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 12:51:26 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: That DAMNED Half Die!

In a message dated 97-08-22 03:11:04 EDT, you write:

<< May Virus  infect your computer Marc! >>

Actually, if you talk to some of the people who I sent the Task chapter to,
you'll find that it did... a macro virus I  think.

Marc

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 12:49:14 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

In a message dated 97-08-22 03:11:14 EDT, you write:

<< > 2. Tasks are too easy.
 
 Yes, very much.  Even highly skilled characters should have a less than
 50% chance of success on Staggering and Impossible Tasks.  
 
  >>
Define Highly Skilled.

S7, C10?

Marc

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 10:45:13 -0600
From: Erwin Fritz <efritz@glja.com>
Subject: Re: Silly question

SemoFetus@aol.com wrote:
> 
> >On a related note, why is it that there is not a comprehensive book on
> >technology other than arms, armor, power plants, and vehicles (AAP&V)? FF&S
> >only dabbled outside of these spheres, and the various item lists in books
> >like MT's Imperial Encyclopedia are very limited and quite conservative in
> >scope (at least that's how they seem to me).
> 
> You're not the only one who's noticeded that.  I, for one, agree entirely.  I
> think that there should be a little more attention paid to the other
> technologies of the Traveller universe (someone had mentioned a little while
> ago that in his M:0 campaign the starships had low-tech, handcrafted accents
> on the bridge and such.  It made me start thinking, and I got these visions
> of starships fit for kings with Corinthian Leather and so on)...
> 
> Anyhow, I agree completely, and, I introduce the "Microfoil Welding System"
> as a start on non-weapon tech:

Ahhhh, stuff like this is why I subscribe to this list. Yep, another
excellent entry for my equipment list!

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

Date: 22 Aug 1997 17:08:19 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

>It is not a hassle if you only do it [the skill multiplier] once (the
calculation) and leave 
>it like that.

Yes, but why do it at all?  

Those of us who have played Traveller for since the beginning have a 'feel'
for what skill levels mean in game terms, but that 'feel' will be wrong with
the new task system anyway.  Other than nostalgia, I can't think of a reason
for _not_ changing the meaning of skill levels.

Backwards compatibility is maintaining by a page on converting between
different versions (eg. to convert a character from MT to T4, multiply all
skill levels by 2).

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

Date: 22 Aug 1997 16:59:15 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

>Personally, I like the idea of skills based on the same scale as
>characteristics. Like Eris says, this means that we could have skill-only
>(Chemistry+Medical for pharmacy, for example) or characteristic-only
>(Dex+Int for a pool shot) tasks.

Good point, Richard (and Eris).  I like this idea: tasks use two values
without being restricted to a skill and an attribute.  Simpler and more
flexible, and training is on par with inate talent.

Assumign that level 6 is an average for a 'professional' skill level, then
your typical 30-year old would have 12x1.25=15 skill levels.  If they put
half into their main skill, they have a level 7: quite respectable.

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 97 18:15 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: Brawling vs Martial Arts skill

In-Reply-To: <33F9A7AA.2189@GLJA.com>

Erwin,

> If someone can come up with the difference between Brawling and
> Martial Arts as that difference applies to the combat rules, I'd
> appreciate it.

Two possibilities:

1. MA does more damage than Brawling (+skill?)
2. MA tasks are a level easier than Brawling

MA should be harder to learn (ie it appears less often on the skill 
charts) to compensate.
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 97 18:15 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: Is the Kinunir a Cruiser?

In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970819134704.0068ce40@waverider.co.uk>

J.,

> There's probably some good reason for this.(I guess it's something to do with
> the different design methods in CT and MT.) But I have always had trouble
> coming up with a reason why the Kinunir is classed as a cruiser.
>  
> Anybody got any good ideas on this?

Size-wise, the Kinunir is more like a destroyer. Maybe they couldn't afford 
'real' cruisers, but didn't want anyone to know? :-)
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 97 18:15 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: Bloodwell Incident.......and a few Questions

In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970818170122.00695a90@waverider.co.uk>

J.,

> 3) What is the reason for Pscias' Red Classification?

IMU* there's a colony of Stone Age Vargr there that the IISS don't want 
to disturb (the longest-running PC in my game came from there - as a 
puppy she stowed away on a Scout/Courier that visited, and by the time 
she was discovered it was too late to send her back. In order to hush 
up this cock-up, the Scouts sort of adopted her. That was a seriously 
twisted PC...)

*In My Universe
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1730
***********************************
Traveller-digest      Friday, August 22 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1731



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Marc's post.
Re: IG Bashing, etc, etc...
Re: Mee-too, dee-too, and wounds (was RE: Task Resolution)
Quick 'n' Dirty CT/MT character conversion (was Re: Task Resolution).
Re: Second careers
Re: Brokers
T4.1 Format/Presentation Idea
Re: "Duplicate" skills
Re: Task Resolution
Re: Task Resolution
The Accidental GearHead
Re: Second careers
[none]
Re: T41 Skills Draft A Armorer
Re: Brokers
Re: Task Resolution
Re: Task Resolution

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 10:22:27 PDT
From: "Charles Li" <chaslimd@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Marc's post.

>From owner-traveller@phaser.showcase.mpgn.com Fri Aug 22 01:10:29 1997
>Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM 
(8.7.3/8.6.9) with SMTP id AAA02908; Fri, 22 Aug 1997 00:45:15 -0400
>Received: by lists.MPGN.COM (bulk_mailer v1.5); Fri, 22 Aug 1997 
00:45:12 -0400
>Received: (from majordom@localhost) by phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM 
(8.7.3/8.6.9) id AAA02705 for traveller-outgoing; Fri, 22 Aug 1997 
00:43:23 -0400
>Received: from Mithril.MPGN.COM (Mithril.MPGN.COM [206.66.87.8]) by 
phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM (8.7.3/8.6.9) with SMTP id AAA02407 for 
<traveller@Phaser.ShowCase.MPGN.COM>; Fri, 22 Aug 1997 00:35:40 -0400
>Received: from emout10.mail.aol.com (emout10.mx.aol.com [198.81.11.25]) 
by Mithril.MPGN.COM (8.6.9/8.6.9) with ESMTP id AAA12339 for 
<traveller@mpgn.com>; Fri, 22 Aug 1997 00:35:39 -0400
>From: CardSharks@aol.com
>Received: (from root@localhost)
>	  by emout10.mail.aol.com (8.7.6/8.7.3/AOL-2.0.0)
>	  id AAA04124 for traveller@mpgn.com;
>	  Fri, 22 Aug 1997 00:35:38 -0400 (EDT)
>Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 00:35:38 -0400 (EDT)
>Message-ID: <970822003537_546315000@emout10.mail.aol.com>
>To: traveller@MPGN.COM
>Subject: Re: Marc's post.
>Sender: owner-traveller@lists.MPGN.COM
>Reply-To: traveller@MPGN.COM
>
>In a message dated 97-08-21 21:47:11 EDT, you write:
>
><< 
> Just one plea - please leave the combat system substantially as it is, 
as
> it is one of the bits in the new rules that I think beats any previous
> edition's. (Nice, fast, task driven and with autofire rules that are
> understandable and playable! ;-) ) Haven't used the unarmed combat 
yet, so
> I won't comment.
>  >>
>
>The problem is they are task driven, but the exposition really doesn't
>specify the tasks. I want it to be task driven, but I want the tasks 
and task
>format to be explicit.
>
>Marc
>
I think the combat system is basically good, tweak and refine at will, 
but, as mentioned before, kill the 3D max damage rule.

 Grid based combat system would be nice too, but this may lead to a 
wargame intense type of combat system (not that its bad, it just may not 
be for everyone)... but with starship deck layouts (hmmn, Traveller 
Naval Architecture) likely to come out as grid based deck layouts (not 
hexes), this may dovetail nicely with a grid-based combat system.

Charles


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 17:22:47 +0100
From: John Wood <John@elvw.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: IG Bashing, etc, etc...

Marc wrote (quoteing out of order),
>I spoke some time ago with one of my former partners and he talked
>about how genteel and understanding everyone on his particular mailing
>list was... why aren't we at that point too?

I don't know, but I've noticed it too.  I'd been on GURPSnet a while,
which has far less confrontation and rankling, so this was a bit of a
shock when I joined.  I still enjoy TML as a great source of discussion
and ideas, but I do wish things were a little gentler here.

>I'm really tired of the Imperium bashing that the net and the TML seems
>to love to do.

I'm as guilty of this as anyone.  The thing is, IG aren't perfect - and
it's so much more natural in our culture(s) to criticise than to praise,
particularly when concerned about the future.  As someone involved in
Re-evaluation Counselling where we are taught to *support* our leaders,
I should know better.

Steve Charlton's position (basically IG is improving but still has
project management problems) pretty much reflects what I believe,
including the stuff about not blaming authors for management problems.
I will add that IG shouldn't be blamed for the realities of business,
either - sure it's a shame FFS2 wasn't written before QSDS, but that
would have vastly delayed *any* return on investment.  IG isn't a
charity.

I am really glad that Traveller is back with us.  I don't have the money
or the will to support IG by buying bad product (which is false support
anyway IMO) or material that doesn't interest me, but I will consider
any and all books they bring out.  Based on what I've seen from Marc, I
*will* buy T4.1; based on LWH, I *will* buy Gateway.  I still won't
order direct because I want to support my local (excellent) game store.

When I have enjoyed a product I try and say so - as I did with PE and
PI.  T4 has already passed TNE in terms of quantity of material of use
and/or interest to me.

My two penn'orth.

 
John G. Wood  |  john@elvw.demon.co.uk  |  Oxford, United Kingdom

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 10:36:34 -0700
From: "Eric Jackson" <Alric@SpryNet.Com>
Subject: Re: Mee-too, dee-too, and wounds (was RE: Task Resolution)

> Or every time you're shot, splashed by a psion, or dropped on your head. Okay, 
> that tears it: my ONE big beef with Traveller, CT/MT, is the deduction of
> wounds from stats.  Arrrgh!  Sorry, I just *hate* that.  How 'bout life levels 
> or somethin'...  Sorry, I meant to not propose a lame fix.

I think that wounds reducing stats is one of the best things about CT/MT/T4
combat rules. When you are injured you do get weaker, dizzy, etc so I find
it a nice simple way to simulate realistic wounds. You don't need some
chart to tell you after loosing 20% of your hits you are at -1, the wound
penalties are built in.

Eric J
Alric@SpryNet.Com
Fuzion Webpage: http://members.aol.com/rfintnl

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 18:55:21 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Quick 'n' Dirty CT/MT character conversion (was Re: Task Resolution).

Rob Prior wrote:

>I disagree with Kenneth here.  I'd rather have a new set of skill levels
>(with a table/formula so I could convert exisitng characters) and not have to
>multiply during the game.  Less hassle for newcomers.

Rob,

I have converted characters using the following method. They have all
played okay.

1) Look up career type and check that it exists in T4(!)

2) Look at skills already present and convert to T4 equivalents.
eg Astrogation from Navigation...

3) If the skill doesn't exist record number of points in that skill.

4) Total number of skill points and divide by <character age> - 18.

a)If this ends up >1 then do not modify the skills (except for any 'lost
points from step 3 which will be dealt with in step 6).

b)If this ends up <1 then work out how many skill points would be needed to
increase this to >1.

5) Take number of skill points required from 4b) and roll on appropriate
T4.1 character tables to allocate each point.

6) Allow player to select skills up to the total number of points from
'lost skills' from the appropriate character tables.

and that's it. Seems to work. I leave stats well alone..

Dom





- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"Omnia Mutantur Nihil Interit"  -  Sandman 'The Wake'
"Everything Changes, but nothing is truly lost" 

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 10:32:56 -0700
From: Scott Ellsworth <Scott_Ellsworth@alumni.hmc.edu>
Subject: Re: Second careers

At 12:35 AM 8/22/97 -0400, Marc wrote:
>In a message dated 97-08-21 08:43:42 EDT, you write:
>
><< 
> I don't understand why you wan't to discourage players from generating
> characters with multiple careers. Why is that? 
>  >>
>Because people skip from career to career vicariously adventuring int he
>pre-generation process prior to starting to adventure. CharGen is not
>intended as a substitute for adventuring; its a way of getting some
>experience before adventuring.

A decent point.  I have a counter, though.  Remember what you paid for it. :)

I have held down a scholar career and an engineer career, alternating
twice, since term 1.  It has been almost five years since my last year or
two of Scholar, and I am thinking of going back again.  Four careers (two
twice) for twelve years.

A friend of mine has held down one career only since his college and grad
school, so two careers in twelve years, covered by the basic rules

Another friend did physics in college, software teaching in a non academic
setting, and is now an engineer, so three careers in 12 years.  This would
be problematic under the current proposed rules.

My father, in a 40 year career, was a scholar, an engineer, a broker, and a
manager.  This is also problematic.

Each of these led into the others, but it seems unlikely that someone is
going to stay with the same career for 20 years in the present day.  M0,
they might, but this seems funny _from todays_ standards.  Judging from the
other people I know, a career lasts between one traveller term and three,
with the median being somewhere around two terms, and 2-3 employers.  Since
many adventurers are in their 20s, and they have often gone to college,
this is not a problem.  Three terms - 12 years - thirty, so most
adventurers should have only one career, but I would be surprised if all.

From this, I get the idea that multiple careers should be allowed, but not
encouraged.  Further, if someone leaves the career they are in "early",
fudging is needed.  Your rules cover that, but it might be worth dropping
in a line like "The standard character generation system does not allow
more than one post education career.  With the approval of the game master,
characters could be designed who have multiple careers, but this is unusual
enough to incite comment, especially if someone has been in their present
careers fewer than three terms."

>Because once multiple careers are allowed, then it becomes more than two...
>it becomes 3 or 4 or 5. I have to draw the line somewhere, and I originally
>drew it at 1. I let Vargr have two. I foolishly let an editor talk me into
>allowing multiple for T4, and I regret it.

Fair enough.

So far, the Millennium's End chargen system is my favorite, as it is
resolved on a yearly level, and is detailed enough for good game fodder.
Unfortunately, the mechanics are clumsy, whereas the T4 mechanics are
pretty clean.

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: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 10:59:53 -0700
From: Scott Ellsworth <Scott_Ellsworth@alumni.hmc.edu>
Subject: Re: Brokers

At 12:27 AM 8/22/97 -0400, Marc wrote:
>In a message dated 97-08-21 21:13:51 EDT, you write:
><<=20
> Problem: If skill levels are supposed to range from 0 to 15 in T4.1 (to=
 put
> them on par with stats), then a professional level in a skill ought to be
> 6+. There would be almost no professionals with Broker-1.
>  >>
>In CT, characters received one skill per term, plus one for commission or
>promotion. The average skill eligibility was between 0.25 and 0.50 per=
 year.

As a result, skill levels of one and two were quite common for skills a
character wanted to have as central in CT, and the young had quite an
advantage, given that first term.

>In Mercenary (and High Guard, etc), there were a variable number of skills
>awarded ranging, but let's say it was between 1  and 1.25 per skills per
>year.

Loved that.

>T4 and specifically T41 has a skill eligibility of approximately 1.25=
 skills
>per year. That rate is formalized by the "experience" rate after=
 adventuring
>begins.

I approve of the new experience rate very, very much.  A welcome change,
and one that clears up a lot of things.

>The rate of receipt of skills by characters in T41 is approximately the=
 same
>as for Mercenary or Enhanced MT characters.

Yep.  This matches my experience, and I approve in general.

>Empirical evidence from playtesting of T41 indicates that most character=
 have
>skill levels between 2 and 4 for the skills that they figure are important.

I would only note that the scale is a bit too linear.  It is as easy, and
as likely to go from 4 to 5, as 1 to 2.

My house rule, offered only as an insight into how we dealt with the
system, is as follows.

I make a player roll to raise a skill above 2, with failures meaning a
related skill of player choice with a lesser level is received.  The roll
is greater than current skill-2, with a six always a success.  I also have
them make a similar roll for stats, where what is important is how the stat
differs from where they started.  It is a heck of a lot easier to go from a
10 to a 12 than a 10 to a 15, imho.

For example, Bob is a Scout.  He has JOT 1, and Pilot 1.

Yr	Skill rolled	Result
1	Pilot		Pilot 2, no roll needed
2	Pilot		Rolls a 5, so gets pilot 3
3	JOT		JOT 2, no roll needed
4	Pilot		Rolls a 1, so chooses Astro 1 instead.	=09
5	Gun		Gun 1, no roll needed
6	Brawling	Brawling 1, no roll needed
7	Engineer	Engineer 1, no roll needed
8	Pilot		Rolls 4, gets Pilot 4.
9	Pilot		Rolls 1, so chooses Astro 2, as it is less than Pilot 4
10	Grav		Grav 2, no roll needed
11	+1 Str		no roll needed
12	Survey		Survey 1, no roll needed

This makes the professional level of skill stay in the 2-3 range, with a 4
still a bit noteworthy, as some people will need it.  It also means that
people will tend to get related skills, and I give the players choice to
limit the die rolling and to encourage character design.

>It is a mistake to say specifically that CT skills ranged from 1 to 6 and=
 T4
>(T41) skills range from 1 to 15. Skills in CT could range from 1 to 15 as
>well.

To be fair, though, since there are more skills received in T4, the levels
will be somewhat higher.  Not as much as one might expect, since there are
six tables, rather than four to roll on, but the skill level variance has
been increased.  (I think this is good, but it is worth noting.)

>The characteristics versus skill debate could range on forever. T41 is=
 going
>to have characteristics and skills.

Yep.  And about half the groups will not be satisfied not matter WHAT you
do.  I will use Stat/3+skill, I suspect, but I care not what anyone else
uses, as long as the tasks in the book are phrased in terms of words and
modifiers in terms of generic difficulty levels.  This is the way it has
been going, and I think it kind of neat.

>Looking deeper into the details of Skill + Characteristic, we come upon
>Competency testing... actually looking at how well a specific character can
>perform specific tasks...

Good idea.  Be sure to phrase it in a task form in the rules whenever
brought up, as then all a DM has to do is fiddle with the task system, and
the rules will still work.  (I know you have done this so far, but I like
to hammer on points that are important to me.  Hammer hammer hammer.)

>Competency Testing
>	A candidate for a position must demonstrate that he or she can succeed at
>various tasks associated with the position. average tasks at the 90 th
>percentile. To accomplish this, the sum of skill level and one of the
>associated characteristics must equal 10 or more.

Easy to translate to other skill systems, as one just need work out the
probabilities for MTS (My Task System)  Also VERY nice in that it specifies
just what a professional should be able to do.

>Position	Prime Skill	(Char)	Req S+C	Collateral Skills
>Captain			=85=09
>Pilot	Pilot	(Int, Edu)	10=09

Also good - it lets a player know just how well they did on their
qualifying exams.

Scott
Scott_Ellsworth@alumni.hmc.edu   http://users.deltanet.com/~fuz
"When a great many people are unable to find work, unemployment=20
results" - Calvin Coolidge, (Stanley Walker, City Editor, p. 131 (1934))
"The barbarian is thwarted at the moat." - Scott Adams

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 11:18:54 PDT
From: "Charles Li" <chaslimd@hotmail.com>
Subject: T4.1 Format/Presentation Idea

Just an idea for consideration by the TML:

In regards to the format of T4.1, has anyone ever seen "Advanced Squad 
Leader" by Avalon Hill.  Their rules are quite unique, presented in a 
format similar to the old U.S. Army manuals.
  All the rules are written in pages that are in a nicely decorated 3 
ring binder.  The rules themselves are colored and on good stock paper.  
The advantages of this format is that it is amenable to revision, as 
different subjects are divided within the binder, and that updated (and 
errata fixed pages) are produced in a timely fashion.  New rules can be 
added directly to the binder.
  This format may suit T4.1 well with its extensive design options 
(FF&S2), etc.  In addition, this would provide a more durable format 
than the bound rulebooks that are currently produced.

  What do you all think?

Charles

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 11:16:16 -0700
From: Scott Ellsworth <Scott_Ellsworth@alumni.hmc.edu>
Subject: Re: "Duplicate" skills

At 02:06 PM 8/22/97 +0100, you wrote:
>One point no-one's mentioned yet is about skill equivalences.
>
>I really hate it when I roll a character (CT) with Liason-3, Admin-2, 
>Streetwise-1.  Since the Liason counts as Admin or Streetwise-2, 
>these skills are "wasted".  Similarly with the Pilot-4, Ship's Boat-2 
>character... a kind GM (ha!) would allow rerolls, anyone got a spare 
>kind referee? 8-)

Well, me.

I use a different approach to character generation.  After it is over, I
have an optimization phase where any so-called useless skill can be
transferred within cluster.  The activity of the character id not change,
but the character's skill levels do.

In a previous post, I mentioned my generation rules, in which I make a
player roll to raise a skill above 2, with failures meaning a related skill
of player choice with a lesser level is received.  The roll is greater than
current skill-2, with a six always a success.

Useless skills are then counted as a gain of the useful skill, with the
gain roll required.

For example, at the end of generation, a character has gotten Liaison 3,
admin 2, SW 1.  The character got all of these as interpersonal skills.

The player attempts to raise liaison by swapping the SW.  He rolls a 6, and
so gets Liaison 4.  He also noted that he has accredited experience with
thugs. :)

He attempts to raise Liaison with one level of admin, and gets a 2.  Since
he fails, he must pick another related skill.  The player decides that this
was the time he spent in the back office, and takes a legal 1 instead.
This was a skill that could have been rolled, and is lower than his current
level of liaison.

He attempts to raise liaison again, and rolls a 5.  This is >= his 4, so
now he has liaison 5.

He could have had a liaison 6, but that would be unlikely.  He also could
have ended up with a liaison 3 and two or three other skills at 1 or 2 that
are peripherally related.  This works pretty well, in that players then end
up with spread out skills, like a lot of ones and twos.

For this to work, you do need lists of related skills, a task I am slowly
working through.  I was cheered to note that the skill clusters make the
work a lot easier.

I am fiddling with the skill definitions a bit to make them seem more
equal.  For example, liaison is better than both SW and Admin, as it serves
as both.  To fix this, I have liaison, admin, and streetwise all serving as
the generic interaction skill, and which one you have as your primary focus
changes how you do things.

The way I am doing this is making skill clusters where you will have a
strength in a skill, and get the others at reduced level.  This way, the
game can have lots of skills, which my players like, without having players
need a small notebook just to know what skills they are competent in.

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: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 14:52:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

In a message dated 97-08-22 08:59:32 EDT, you write:

<< What really needs to be done is for Mark to *clearly* spell out, in
 T4.1,  >>

Marc

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 12:03:10 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

> << > 2. Tasks are too easy.
> 
> Yes, very much.  Even highly skilled characters should have a less than
> 50% chance of success on Staggering and Impossible Tasks.  
> 
>  >>
> Define Highly Skilled.
> S7, C10?

No - *you* define Highly Skilled; you're writing the task system and 
character generation system. "Highly Skilled" should mean something like 
"a slightly better than average PC excercising the skill she's best at"; 
C10 is probably reasonable, and if the cgen system produces S7 that's what
you should use. The point is that the task system *has* to have a level of
difficulty sufficient to make it hard for talented PCs to do something - there
have to be *some* tasks that are 10% success chance or less even for the
best. (This is particularly relevant in combat tasks. If fire at maximum
range is Impossible, but good PCs have a 40% chance of succeeding at Impossible,
then a target is either completely unhittable (outside max range) or 40%
hittable; that's very awkward - there should be a range at which even a good
PC has a 10% chance of hitting someone. I noticed this when I did the sensor
stuff - I wanted maximum-range sensor tasks to be hard even for very good
sensor operators, but the system didn't support it (T4, at least.))

Bruce

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 19:38:02
From: Paolo Marino <marino@inrete.it>
Subject: The Accidental GearHead

As I explained some weeks ago (the Tactical Scenario Thread),
I'll soon have to run a Starship vs. G-carriers scenario for my players.

I don't own Starship, nor EA and FF&S2 has not even arrived in Italy.
All I have are T4, CSC, and the downloaded QSDS.
I spent a couple hours trying to reverse engineer some of the
stuff I have and coming up with a workable solution.

Here is my problems:
The Starship is more or less equivalent to a Scout/Courier, but
it's armed with a TL-13 Civilian laser, 29 MW power.  
The Ship's armor is rated as 10 according to the QSDS and T4
manual.

I worked out some numbers (with more than a little help from my
SO, which is a Computer Engineer) in order to translate all this
in something which I can use with the CSC vehicle system.

What I got is as follows:

Starship Laser
- --------------
Dmg: 19, Range: Very long. 
To hit:  (Dex+Gunnery), Impossible
Fire Control will add +6
Agility for G-Carriers will give another +1 
Possibly other +DM for sensors and/or clever tactics on the PCs part.
(The range stuff is quite subjective and not based on actual
calculation). 
The laser will be able to fire once per combat turn.

Starship Armor
- --------------
Some "back of the envelope" calculations gave starship hull
thickness at around 8 cm. With Superdense, it should be
something like Rigid Armor:22, according to CSC.
Unfortunately, CSC seems to imply that 22 is equivalent to USP
armor 2, instead of 10. This last part is not terribly
important, because the G-Carriers mount kinetic weapons and so
they will probably be unable to do much against the starship.
[They have goods reasons to prefer kinetic weapons on this
mission.]

The question is: are these numbers remotely similar to stuff
produced with other supplements? They seem reasonable to me, but
I'd really hate to have to chance things later... the PCs will
probably try to use their ship as a weapon in other situations,
so I'd like to have a minimum of constistency in this.


TIA to all,



__  Paolo Marino  __          |Inrete Games Page: www.inrete.it/games/gms.html
 mc4799@mclink.it (Preferred)  | marino@inrete.it (Best for MIME/BinHex)

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

Date: 22 Aug 97 15:15:42 EDT
From: Jeffery.M.Miller@Dartmouth.EDU (Jeffery M. Miller)
Subject: Re: Second careers

Guess I haven't been watching THAT closely...

Theres a prohibition to multiple career paths? Good Lord why? As Hans so
correctly pointed out, how can you have a Ex-marine diplomat or the like
without the extra career branches? Quite rightly again, the age factor sets a
fine and comprehensible limit for too much pre-adventure careering.

Myself, I guess I'll buck the rules and do it the way I've always done it. So
Ka.

- -j

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 14:36:29 -0500
From: "Joul, Christopher" <JOUC1@Aerial1.com>
Subject: [none]

You wrote,

>Date: Fri, 22 Aug 97 18:15 BST-1
>From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
>Subject: Re: Brawling vs Martial Arts skill
>
>In-Reply-To: <33F9A7AA.2189@GLJA.com>
>
>Erwin,
>
>> If someone can come up with the difference between Brawling and
>> Martial Arts as that difference applies to the combat rules, I'd
>> appreciate it.
>
>Two possibilities:
>
>1. MA does more damage than Brawling (+skill?)
>2. MA tasks are a level easier than Brawling
>
>MA should be harder to learn (ie it appears less often on the skill 
>charts) to compensate.

Or perhaps:-

1. MA does more damage than Brawling.
AND
2. MA tasks are one level harder than brawling.

MA skills as easy to obtain as brawling.

Personaly I like the rules for MA in Runequest, where after attacking
with a fist, a separate roll is made against MA skill to see if you do
extra damage.  So perhaps the following could be used.

1. Roll to Hit using Brawling.

If Hit

2 Roll against MA to see if higher damage level done.

Just some suggestions.

Personaly I prefer just brawling to cover all styles of unarmed
fighting.

Chris.

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 97 21:16 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: T41 Skills Draft A Armorer

In-Reply-To: <970819110103_-2004530711@emout09.mail.aol.com>

> First, I think that mandating a TL aspect of "Mechanic" or some such would
> make the game more inaccessible with little gain otherwise. For game masters
> who care to, they can impose such additional realism. In any case, most

It's probably worth mentioning, if only as an optional rule. Specify by TL 
Group rather than specific TL, with the default being the same as the PC's 
Homeworld (eg Mechanic(MidTech)-2)).
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 15:06:44 +0000
From: Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: Brokers

CardSharks@aol.com wrote:

> Empirical evidence from playtesting of T41 indicates that most character have
> skill levels between 2 and 4 for the skills that they figure are important.
> 
> It is a mistake to say specifically that CT skills ranged from 1 to 6 and T4
> (T41) skills range from 1 to 15. Skills in CT could range from 1 to 15 as
> well.

This is a well informed view of things that I completely agree with.  If
T4.1 is providing skills to characters in a similar fashion as CT
advanced chargen (mercenary, etc), then I am completely happy.

Given this, skill definitions should remain the same, which is what I
wanted in the first place.  Skill-1 is a novice;  Skill-3 is a
professional;  Skill-5 is an expert.

That's EXACTLY what I wanted!

Now, if we can just make sure that skills contribute as much to task
success as stats, I'd be a really happy camper.

Kenneth.

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 15:40:50 +0000
From: Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

Rob Prior wrote:

> Assumign that level 6 is an average for a 'professional' skill level, then
> your typical 30-year old would have 12x1.25=15 skill levels.  If they put
> half into their main skill, they have a level 7: quite respectable.


But, skills in T4.1 will not be like this, according to Marc's post
today.  He said that character's skills will average between 2-4, just
like in CT/MT.

You might get an occassional level 7, but that happened in CT too.

Given this information, based on Marc's empiracle (how do you spell that
word anyway?) evidence, we don't need new skill definitions.

Kenneth.

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 15:36:44 +0000
From: Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

Rob Prior wrote:
> 
> >It is not a hassle if you only do it [the skill multiplier] once (the
> calculation) and leave
> >it like that.
> 
> Yes, but why do it at all?
> 
> Those of us who have played Traveller for since the beginning have a 'feel'
> for what skill levels mean in game terms, but that 'feel' will be wrong with
> the new task system anyway.

Not according to Marc's new post. It looks like skills will be about the
same value as they were in CT/MT.

  Other than nostalgia, I can't think of a reason
> for _not_ changing the meaning of skill levels.

If the skills will be about the same value-wise, then there is no reason
at all for changing the meaning of skill levels--and it is still
backwards compatible.

So, now we are left with the problem (if you think it is a problem as I
do) of having skills contribute as much to task success as stats do.  

Thus, I bring in the multiplier, done one time and written on the
character's sheet.

You asked why, this is why.

Kenneth.

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1731
***********************************
Traveller-digest      Friday, August 22 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1732



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: alternate tech discussion
Re: Early Charges?
Re: Mee-too, dee-too, and wounds (was RE: Task Resolution)
Re: Task Resolution
Re: Mee-too, dee-too, and wounds (was RE: Task Resolution)
Re: "Duplicate" skills
Re: T4.1 Format/Presentation Idea
Starship Combat, the Good Old Days Era
Re: Second careers
Competency Testing
Re: Hiver Manipulations (was Re: History)
Multiple Careers - A suggestion for Marc
Re: E21 a la Marcus 
Sensor detection?
Re: Silly Question
Competency Levels
Task Resolution: Let's organize the discussion
Task Resolution: Captain's Compentency

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 16:45:20 -0400
From: Daniel Ray Lane <drlane@pinn.net>
Subject: Re: alternate tech discussion

Richard Hough wrote:
> 
> >Perhaps my point would be better made to suggest we consider
> >the next cutting edge tech to come along rather than forcing
> >the RoM to use old 80x86's cannibalized from IBM PCs.  (A TL 7
> >RoM).
> 
> What about power, control, and logic devices using photonic (optical
> devices controlling pulses of light), gravitic (employing solid-state
> matricies of gravitic potentials), or nucleonic (microscopic machines using
> tghe strong nuclear force) technology? These technologies could have
> significantly greater bandwidth, power, and reliability than electronic
> technology. I think AT&T has experimented with photonic devices.
> 
> NB. Fiber optics are not photonic devices; they are merely a transport
> mechanism. The power and logic is supplied by familiar old electrons.
> 
> --
> Richard Hough
> rdhough@orca.bc.ca

I concur.  These are exactly the technologies I felt would be employed.
Now we should decide in which order (i.e. at which TL does each technology
become robust and/or generally available?

Concerning fiber optics...

As these employ visible or near visible light wavelength photons for
transmission of information, they should be considered a basic entrant
into the photonics field of technology.  I have no idea what those 
who are working with this technology consider them, but along with the 
CCDs, photoresistors, and other optical-electronic interface devices 
that they interface through, they certainly are photo-electronic
devices.

Perhaps some neologism are required (here stated with EM analogs)?

photonic - electronic (integrated circuits, small scale integrated
microcircuitry
		and logic circuits)

photic - electric (large scale power transport, lighting, etc...)

electromechanical - photoelectrical

Just a beginning.  Please comment and add to this.

Dan Lane

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 17:00:09 -0400
From: Thomas Walter Trelenberg <tomt@scri.fsu.edu>
Subject: Re: Early Charges?

Harold Hale wrote:

**********************************
Give them a chance to make things right.  The *vast* majority of
businesses out there will be all too happy to make things right, and
**********************************

I hope Traveller Chronicle, of which I believe you now said you were a
part, has also adopted this policy.  It was a lack of this attitude
which, after not receiving two issues and being left with no recourse
that I dropped my subscription.  I hope that now that you are a part of
this enterprise, you will hold to these ideals, because dependable
support of Traveller from companies (outside IG) is very important to
its survival.  Outside companies often provide very interesting insite
into the platforms they support which seem to be "missed" by the
"parent" company.  Look at DGP! :-}

TT

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 15:46:29 +0000
From: Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: Mee-too, dee-too, and wounds (was RE: Task Resolution)

Eric Jackson wrote:

> I think that wounds reducing stats is one of the best things about CT/MT/T4
> combat rules. When you are injured you do get weaker, dizzy, etc so I find
> it a nice simple way to simulate realistic wounds. You don't need some
> chart to tell you after loosing 20% of your hits you are at -1, the wound
> penalties are built in.

Exactly.  By reducing stats, you account for damage, wound effects, and
reduced chance of success on post-wound tasks--all of this in one short,
neat, calculation.

It's elegant, simple, and a stroke of genius.  More RPG's should use
this system--not the other way around.

EX--in D&D, your character only has one hit point left, but even though
he only has 1 hit point left, he can make a STR check just as well as he
could at full health, and he has no problem hitting his opponent just as
well as he could before either.

He's near death, but all of his other functions operate just as good as
ever?

Traveller handles this much better.  It is one of the great things about
the game.

Kenneth.

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 15:11:35 -0600
From: Glenn Hoppe <starcity@sk.sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

CardSharks@aol.com wrote:
> 
> In a message dated 97-08-22 08:59:32 EDT, you write:
> 
> << What really needs to be done is for Mark to *clearly* spell out, in
>  T4.1,  >>
> 
> Marc

Sorry 'bout that.

After the mail came up, a mental "D'oh!" went through my head, I hate it
when others spell (or pronounce) my name incorrectly, so I'm usually
quite concientious. Finger slipped.

You will note that I spelt your name correctly through the rest of that
email :)

Glenn Hoppe ("hop" syn. "jump" *not* "hope")

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 16:28:13 -0500
From: Alex Ingram <ingram@airmail.net>
Subject: Re: Mee-too, dee-too, and wounds (was RE: Task Resolution)

Eric Jackson wrote:
> 
> > Or every time you're shot, splashed by a psion, or dropped on your head.
> Okay,
> > that tears it: my ONE big beef with Traveller, CT/MT, is the deduction of
> 
> > wounds from stats.  Arrrgh!  Sorry, I just *hate* that.  How 'bout life
> levels
> > or somethin'...  Sorry, I meant to not propose a lame fix.
> 
> I think that wounds reducing stats is one of the best things about CT/MT/T4
> combat rules. When you are injured you do get weaker, dizzy, etc so I find
> it a nice simple way to simulate realistic wounds. You don't need some
> chart to tell you after loosing 20% of your hits you are at -1, the wound
> penalties are built in.
> 
> Eric J
> Alric@SpryNet.Com
> Fuzion Webpage: http://members.aol.com/rfintnl


Reducing stats when injured is an elegant and efficient way to handle
lowered overall performance. I really like it, don't mess with it
please!

Alex Ingram
ingram@airmail.net

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 15:11:01 -0600
From: Glenn Hoppe <starcity@sk.sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: "Duplicate" skills

Scott Ellsworth wrote:
> 
> At 02:06 PM 8/22/97 +0100, you wrote:
> >One point no-one's mentioned yet is about skill equivalences.
> >
> >I really hate it when I roll a character (CT) with Liason-3, Admin-2,
> >Streetwise-1.  Since the Liason counts as Admin or Streetwise-2,
> >these skills are "wasted".  Similarly with the Pilot-4, Ship's Boat-2
> >character... a kind GM (ha!) would allow rerolls, anyone got a spare
> >kind referee? 8-)
> 
> Well, me.
> 
> I use a different approach to character generation.  After it is over, I
> have an optimization phase where any so-called useless skill can be
> transferred within cluster.  The activity of the character id not change,
> but the character's skill levels do.

Guess I haven't read the rulebook closely enough.

I think if a skill can always be substituted at one level lower, then
the related skills *should* belong to a skill cascade. I wasn't aware
that Liason counts as Admin or Streetwise.

I don't see Liaison (a negotiation, communication skill) as being
terribly related to Admin (working within a bureaucracy) or Streetwise
(being able to "fit in", connecting with the underculture). They are
broadly related, yes, but not enough to warrant use of a reduced level
in the other skill in all situations.


In short, no skill should be "useless". If it is, then one skill has
been made too powerful (because it can "substitute" a wide variety of
skills). Related skills should belong to a cascade, skill definitions
should be made clear enough so that there is no overlap. 

Skill substitution is possible only in special circumstances dictated by
the Task Description, *no* skill should be said to *always* be a
substitute for another (ex. Pilot/Ship's Boat). I think the skill def's
need revising if this is the case.

IMHO

Glenn.

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 15:21:41 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: Re: T4.1 Format/Presentation Idea

<Snip of Binder format>

There was consdiderable discussion of this format when T4 was first being
discussed, the consensus ended up being (after some input from people
ewho've actually _produced_ such things) that it was expensive, and people
who are in the RPG market nowadays seem to want glossy covered expensive
books rather than a three ring binder, the usual triumph of style over
utility...(how else to account for such monstrosities as the Lincoln 4x4)

 

Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 15:21:20 -0700 (PDT)
From: Craig Berry <cberry@cinenet.net>
Subject: Starship Combat, the Good Old Days Era

> Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 08:17:38 -0700
> From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
> 
> At 12:53 AM 8/23/97 +1200, Andrew wrote:
> 
> >"QSDS, SSDS, FF&S2; piffle, in my day we used High Guard, crumpled
> fish'n'chip
> >paper and a burnt stick to write on it, you youn'uns just don't know when
> >you've got it good"
> 
> High Guard?  My brother and I used to dream of having HG!  we used Book 2,
> in base 7 maths, and we LIKED it!  These kids today, no respect for tradition!

Aaaaah...LBB 2 starship combat...now *that* was a system!  Triple-weapon
turrets, beam lasers, a movement system based on thumbtacks and standard
metric string-lengths...and best of all, a distance scale in which planets
were *big*, like 10 cm across or so.  Never mind that prudent starship
pilots feared enemy missile fire far less than the dreaded (and all too
common) Flying Off the Edge of the Desk...and spoke in hushed whispers of
the still more horrifying Cat Walking Around on the Desk.

(So, Douglas...what *did* become of the battered but glorious Really Big
Desk, site of so many random corsair encounters?)

- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
   |   Craig Berry - cberry@cinenet.net
 --*--    Home Page: http://www.cinenet.net/users/cberry/home.html
   |      Member of The HTML Writers Guild: http://www.hwg.org/   
       "Every man and every woman is a star."

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 23:08:54 +0000 ()
From: kraehe@bakunin.hb.north.de (Michael Koehne)
Subject: Re: Second careers

Moin CardSharks@aol.com,

> Because people skip from career to career vicariously adventuring int he
> pre-generation process prior to starting to adventure. CharGen is not
> intended as a substitute for adventuring; its a way of getting some
> experience before adventuring.
> 
> Because once multiple careers are allowed, then it becomes more than two...
> it becomes 3 or 4 or 5. I have to draw the line somewhere, and I originally
> drew it at 1. I let Vargr have two. I foolishly let an editor talk me into
> allowing multiple for T4, and I regret it.

	- Schools are first term careers.
	- Military careers have to be started in 1st or 2nd term,
	  if the 1st was School.
	- Civilian careers can be started later as a second career.
	- Some careers should be only for older characters, e.g.
	  Diplomat, Agent as a second career.

	I would realy like it when T4.1 would have much more careers
	( outing as a TNE guy ;-) to chose from. TNE had more color
	for character generation, while T4 is faster. In general
	I prefer the KISS principe ( Keep it simple sushi ) of T4
	rules over TNE rules (e.g. in combat) but as the character
	generation is a single and important event. I would prefer
	a wider range of pre adventure occupations.

	- Law School, Technical School, Athlethe/Martial-Artist,
	  Attorney, Barbarian, Belter, Bounty Hunter, Burocrat,
	  Civil Engineer, Civil Pilot, Construction Worker, Corsair,
	  Criminal, Diplomat, Hunter, Journalist, Law Enforcer, Manager, 
	  Mechanic, Mercenary, Mechant (Sub)Marine, Prisoner,
	  Professor/non technical, Researcher/Scientist (technical),
	  Rebel, Tough, Aviaion, Special Operations, Wet Navy.

	just a list of posible TNE careers missing in T4.
- -- 
	kraehe@bakunin.north.de		human.is-bremen.de/~kraehe/traveller
		  " ceterum censeo MSDOS esse delendam "

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 17:32:38 -0500
From: Alex Ingram <ingram@airmail.net>
Subject: Competency Testing

In my universe the Professional Associations and Trade Guilds provide
certification testing for their members. A PC applies and once accepted
by the membership committee and voted in by the general membership they
gain the privileges and prestige of their organization. Operating on
most developed worlds the associations and guilds serve a number of
different functions: labor negolation & bargaining, political
action/lobbying, employment services, social clubs, sports activities,
visiting guest facilities, certification testing, member insurance and
medical benefits and credit unions. Some guilds/associations are quite
wealthy and have elaborate and extensive facilities on many worlds.

Some of the guilds and associations in my universe are: the Associations
of the Imperial Navy/Army/Scouts; the Star Guild; the Mercenary Guild;
the Merchant's Guild, The Imperial Associations of
Science/Medicine/Bar/Business/Press; and the Society of Knights &
Nobles.

Guilds and Associations carry much weight within and outside the
Imperium due to their ability to organize their membership and conducts
boycotts and strikes. They have also be instrumental in their
credentialing efforts which has help merchant lines, charter companies
and the megacorporations to secure lower ship insurance rates if they
hire a fully certified crew. In fact, many companies and trading houses
will not hire uncertified personnel. A side benefit is that crew pay
scales are higher due to certification.

Depending on the skill level the testing process could take a few hours
or several days and vary from few hundred credits to thousands. The
higher the skill level the more difficult the testing. If a character
does not make his certification roll at the tested skill level, they
will temporarly lose one skill level (they did not really know the skill
after all - it was just a paper skill). They can then retest at the next
lower skill level and risk losing it as well, or not. If they pass the
test they receive formal certification. Dropping a skill level via
testing is not always permanent. If the PC enters an extensive training
program in that skill (classes and trainers are also offered by the
guilds/associations) after a specified time (usually three to six
months) they may retest. If they fail to pass on the thrid try they
generally have to wait one year to retest again. Associations and guilds
will only test those skills that are related to their profession or
trade. Of course, not all skills are testable (ie, streetwise, liaision,
bribery).

Alex Ingram
ingram@airmail.net

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 14:41:13 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Re: Hiver Manipulations (was Re: History)

> > The key difference between 3I humanity and Hivers is that while 
> > humans view manipulation as reprehensible (at least when it's applied 
> > to them) and to be concealed, the Hivers glory in it.  If PCs skip 
> > out to the 3I with the secret of the Star Trigger, the 3I is not 
> > going to be any more defined by it, nor are the Darrians less defined 
> > by it -- it's not their big secret, but it's a damned effective 
> > weapon that's now known to *work*.
> 
> And why shouldn't the Hivers glory in it...it is, to them, the perfect
> defensive weapon...they don't risk themselves physically, far fewer people
> die than in wars, and it ends by your enemy _agreeing_ to do what you
> want, _happily_. I think that the most widely known Hiver manipulation,
> that of the K'Kree, is probably considered mostly a failure by the Hivers,
> simply because it _is_ so well known, that they had to go to the lengths
> they did, confronting the K'Kree, and basically threatening them by
> revealing that they'd manipulated some K'Kree into eating meat.

Hivers & Ithulkur for TNE claimed that the K'Kree started eating meat as
a response to the Ithulkur soldiers eating dead K'Kree on planets which
were low in supplies.  I realize that a lot of people out there are not
to thrilled by some of the more satirical elements of Ithulkur culture
as presented in that book but this bit always seemed like a good detail.

If we believe this accont the successful Hiver manipulation was in
duping the K'Kree into believing that they had managed to induce
carnivorous behavior among the K'Kree when in reality it was the
Ithulkur who had (inadvertantly) intorduced this behavior. If the Hivers
are capable of fooling the K'Kree with these sort of lies face to face
where the K'Kree can smell them then I think we probably need to assume
that Hivers do not give off a different smell when they are lying. 
(More proof of Hiver's being naturally inclined towards Manipulation. :)

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 15:42:55 -0700
From: scharlto@ifsna.com
Subject: Multiple Careers - A suggestion for Marc

The problem Marc was trying to avoid (if I recall clearly) was the tendency
to treat character generation as an ad hoc adventure of its own.  I'm of
mixed minds on this; I clearly remember sitting around and creating High
Guard and Mercanry characters just for the fun of it, due to the wonderful
annual detail which let me basically write a story about the character.  On
the other hand, as a GM I can recall many instances of a player wanting to
feed his character through as many different careers as possible in order
to get a wide variety of skills.  This would be classical munchkinism.

I do have a suggestion (which I used in my campaign).  I blatantly stole a
concept from GDW's Twilight:2000 chargen rules, and had the player roll a
d10 after each term if he decided to switch careers.  If the roll was less
than the character's total terms served (in all careers), chargen stopped
and the character began play.  If the player stopped chargen before the
"Play Start" roll happened, I generally gave him some nice minor bennies
(usually an extra mustering out roll or two).

The roll did not tabke place after the first term, and there was no roll if
the player stuck to one career.



Jeffery.M.Miller@Dartmouth.EDU (another Miller?  Is Marc packing the TML
with relatives?  Nepotism!  I call Nepotism!) said:

> Subject: Re: Second careers
>
> Guess I haven't been watching THAT closely...
>
> Theres a prohibition to multiple career paths? Good Lord why? As Hans
> so correctly pointed out, how can you have a Ex-marine diplomat or the
> like without the extra career branches? Quite rightly again, the age
> factor sets a fine and comprehensible limit for too much pre-adventure
> careering.

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 18:09:20 -0600 (MDT)
From: Marcus Teter <marcus@geminga.physics.montana.edu>
Subject: Re: E21 a la Marcus 

"Glenn Crawford" <glennc@nelvana.com> wrote:

> > How about the corporate states?
> I've always thought corps won't rule but rather abuse laws in "pisspot"
> nations like Liberia and threaten legit nation states. Corps cannot defeat
> even a small nation state, but they can threaten to leave and thus
> intimidate nation states. Perhaps you should make a list of good, average
> and mean-spirited megacorps

Good idea.  I'll include it.

Marcus

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

Date: 22 Aug 1997 19:02 EDT
From: "Robert Eaglestone" <eaglesto@nortel.ca>
Subject: Sensor detection?

What are y'all's rulings on detection using sensors?

What size mass is "easily" detected by ship sensors?  A beach
ball floating in the outer solar system?  How long does a 
passive scan take if you don't know where a bogey might be
in a system?

Anyone plot out TL's vs Equipment = distance x size code?  
Anyone approach this in an interesting way?

Our group decided that an energy source is pretty detectable
by anyone.  But how 'bout a vehicle coasting in?  Or, what
about a comet?

1. How Good are Your Sensors?
=============================

Sensors			Rating?  (or should I just use the "P" rating?)
- --------------------------------
Civilian:
	Basic:		1
	Improved:	2
Military:
	Small:		4
	Medium:		8
	Large:		16

Sensor strength: TL x Sensor Rating ?


Craft		Sensor strength
- ---------------------------------	
Pre-stellar 	7  - 16  or so
Early stellar	10 - 48  or so
Stellar         12 - 100 or so
High Stellar    25 - 256 or so


2. How Far can They See?
========================

Distance x Ship's Size Code?


Help!


Thanks,
Rob

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 19:08:50 -0400
From: "Michael D. Peters" <Letterworks@Comten.com>
Subject: Re: Silly Question

> Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 22:54:44 +0000 ()
> From: kraehe@bakunin.hb.north.de (Michael Koehne)
> Subject: Re: Silly question
>
> Moin Michael D. Peters,
>
>
<First Snip>

>
>         I often do it. Here is my "role playing ship combat system"
>
>         - BE PREPARED !
>         - Place a map of the ship on the table. The map has to have
>           grids. I also prepare a d20 translation for the deckplans
>           as I'm using TNE hit locations. Any player has to place his
>           poeppel somewhere on the map.
>         - Place a clock next to the map. I always referee ship combats
>           in REAL TIME. Civilian laser fire every 3 minutes,
>           military lasers any 30 seconds.
>         - Anything on the player ship is task based now. There is NO
>           HEXMAP for the combat. I'm using a pocket calculator for
>           astrogation (Atari Portfolio) and as the LCD has a very
>           narrow engle of view, there is no posibility to lurk. I
>           dislike a referees screen hiding me from the players, so
>           if you dont use a pocket calculator be shure that the
>           screen is between the paperwork and the players, and not
>           between the players and you.
>         - All space tasks are UNCERTAIN. Uncertain princip and real
>           time produces a very dense athmosphere. I let the sensor
>           op make his roll, if it was successfull I divide his roll
>           by the modified target number multiply it by 30 minutes,
>           and tell him later (portfolio manage this beeping up with
>           a message ;-), if it was a miss, the task fail without
>           any notice. I dont tell players if they hit. The sensor
>           op has to roll on. Its difficult to tell if a hit was
>           placed and formidable to distinct between sandcasters,
>           decoys and fuel hits.
>         - Never extend a battle for more than 5 turns (2,5 hours),
>           preparing jump is a matter of less than an hour or imposible
>           by rule. So disengaging is most times posible in long
>           range battles. If the group manage to stay alive for
>           that time cheat the moral roll and disengage.
>
> By Michael
> - --
>         kraehe@bakunin.north.de
> human.is-bremen.de/~kraehe/traveller
>                   " ceterum censeo MSDOS esse delendam "

Michael, Andrew and others,

Thank you. This is exactly what I hoped would happen when I posted that
question. It appears to me that of the people who have responded most
take a role playing approach to space combat, smoething that I have been
thinkng long and hard about incorperating and your replies have shown me
that it is the way to go. Again Thanks.

On a slightly off thread note, I just wanted to mention that I called my
local game store today in hopes of picking up a copy of FFS2 this
weekend. He told me 3-4 copies showed up, late due to the UPS strike and
that all were gone already! (Drat, got to be FASTER!) Well, now he has
been told to hold one for me when the reorder that he's already placed
comes in. Along with a copy of M:0 or M:0 Campaign which also has been
sold out since it hit the store! I guess some one out there is buying
this stuff! (how bout it any one in the South Jersey, Philadelphia area
lurking out there? I ref and am will to add players, but I really want
to PLAY! sorry for the ad ;).

Mike Peters

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 97 18:11:15 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Competency Levels

Marc,

>A candidate for a position must demonstrate that he or she can succeed
>at various tasks associated with the position. average tasks at the 90 th
>percentile. To accomplish this, the sum of skill level and one of the
>associated characteristics must equal 10 or more.

Let's not focus on the "equal 10 or more part yet", but on the "90th
percentile" for average tasks.

I would contend that a truly competent person should succeed on Average
tasks almost 100% of the time, and on Difficult tasks around 75% of the
time.

IMO
                      Percentage Chance of Success
                      
            Beginner    Average     Competent       
           with skill  Journeyman  Professional    Master
           ==============================================
 Average      70%        90%          99%          100%
 Difficult    25%        50%          75%           90%
 Formidable    5%        20%          40%           50%
 Staggering    1%        10%          15%           25%
 Impossible    0%         1%           2%           10%

I would further contend that NO Beginner (no matter how naturally talented)
should have a better chance of success than a Competent Professional of
*average* natural ability.  OTOH, a naturally talented Beginner should have
as good (or even a better) chance of success than a Journeyman of average
natural ability.

What do others think?


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

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 97 17:45:34 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Task Resolution: Let's organize the discussion

On 08/22/97 at 12:03 PM,  bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh) said:

>No - *you* define Highly Skilled; you're writing the task system and 
>character generation system. 

Marc, I think Bruce has made a valid point here.  Those of us who have
expressed interest in the "Great Task Debate" all have ideas as to how the
task system (and character generation system too) should be set up, but
those ideas are moot, once *you* have decided on each of the issues making
up this discussion.

Maybe, we can break this down into smaller steps, and have you sign off on
each issue as it is finalized.  That way we can keep the discussion more
focused.

For example:

Basic Task Determination Mechanic Possibilities:  

 1.  Roll a Fixed Number of dice for all tasks, and have the Target
     Number vary based on difficulty in some way.  (this is MT or TNE
     style)

 2.  Roll a Variable Number of dice for tasks based on the level of
     difficulty, and have the Target Number stay fixed based on
     Characteristic + Skill.  (this is T4 style)

Marc, I *think* you have firmly decided on mechanic number 2.  If that's
the case then any discussion of mechanic 1 is basically off-topic for this
particular discussion.  If I'm wrong and you are still considering mechanic
1, then we should discuss the pros and cons of these (and the 2 or 3 other
mechanics I can think of) until you *have* decided. 

Once you announce your choice we should "hush-up" about that topic (for a
little while anyway ;-), and move on to the next topic.

I'm going to assume (I know the joke ;-) that you have firmly decided on
mechanic 2, and T4.1 will use a variable number of dice...Please correct me
if I'm wrong...and suggest that the next topic to be discussed should be
what you have termed Competency Levels.  Not how many dice!  Not half dice!
Not the range of skills or characteristics!



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

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 97 18:26:43 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Task Resolution: Captain's Compentency

On 08/22/97 at 12:11 AM,  CardSharks@aol.com said:

>Position	Prime Skill	(Char)	Req S+C	Collateral Skills
>Captain				
>Pilot	Pilot	(Int, Edu)	10	

Marc, leaving aside the specific number 10 (perhaps it should be 12 or 13,
but that's a different discussion ;-), I don't think the position of
Captain should be limited to only expert pilots..pilots can be hired. The
Captain should be competent in something, certainly, but not necessarily
piloting.  She could be an expert Astrogator, Sensor Operator, even an
expert Merchant who hires the rest of her crew..don't you think?

OTOH, Chief Pilot, Engineer, ect. might very well require an expert in
certain specific skills.  

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

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1732
***********************************
Traveller-digest      Friday, August 22 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1733



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: T4.1 Format/Presentation Idea
New Proposal for the RoM TL Debate
Re: Event Horizon
Re: Stutterwarp & Heisenberg revisited once again ...
DMG cartoons
Re: ARRRRGGGHH!!! Mk. II
Re: Event Horizon
Skill levels
Re: T4.1 Skills, Craftsman
A suggestion concerning FUDGE dice
Re: Marc's post.
Re: T4.1 Format/Presentation Idea
Re: Mee-too, dee-too, and wounds (was RE: Task Resolution)
Re: What I'd like to see--Task Resolution
Rob Prior rules.
Good, bad, and evil megacorps.
Re:  Grid for Combat
Re: Second careers
Re: What I'd like to see--Task Resolution

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 19:32:20 -0400
From: Daniel Ray Lane <drlane@pinn.net>
Subject: Re: T4.1 Format/Presentation Idea

Bruce Johnson wrote:

> There was consdiderable discussion of this format when T4 was first being
> discussed, the consensus ended up being (after some input from people
> ewho've actually _produced_ such things) that it was expensive, and people
> who are in the RPG market nowadays seem to want glossy covered expensive
> books rather than a three ring binder, the usual triumph of style over
> utility...(how else to account for such monstrosities as the Lincoln 4x4)
> 

Yes, but many of the books on the market include nice three-ring
punched holes.  Why not make a binder available (a nice D ring
binder at that) with a really good cover insert and back insert.
Maybe just the plain old Red/Black Classic Traveller "Traveller" 
and "Starship Beowulf" blurb.

After all, IG has invested in the much less useful hardcover.  Why not
a binder. I guess this could cause some assemply problems for the 
binder inserts if you also wanted to market them as a paperback so this
could, in fact, pose a problem.

- -Dan Lane

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 19:45:59 -0400
From: Daniel Ray Lane <drlane@pinn.net>
Subject: New Proposal for the RoM TL Debate

How about framing this debate in the setting of Milieu 0 or Milieu
1100?  

Both Leroy's camp (the "Solomanists") and the "Imperialists" make 
excellent points that support their theses.  I can imagine that this 
debate really DID rage among academicians, industrialists and scouts
of the early Imperium.  Perhaps it persisted in Imperial circles well 
into the 1100.  A precendent is the whole modern "lost civilizations" 
discussion (i.e. Atlantis, Antarctica, etc...)

It makes for both a mystery and interesting discussion, tending to add
an extra dimension to a universe.  Things like "Anomalies" would have 
added tremendous fuel to the fire (and uncertainty to individuals'
basic assumptions. 

Here's my suggestion (actually an enthusiastic request.  Both groups
agree on the milieu that the debate occured most vigorously in.
Create a "academic persona," a notable authority on the RoM or its
relics.  Then have at it, in character, on the list.  

Structure the discussion as an entertaining and informative debate 
(with footnotes to cite Canon sources).

Of course, most of the basic arguments have been advanced.  I just would
like to know who the old coots scrapping over this were.  Develop their
backgrounds, families, etc...  Did any of them have eligible college
aged daughters eager to prove their parents' assertions?

Could be interesting!  Anyone else think so?

- -Dan Lane

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 20:07:46 -0400
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: Re: Event Horizon

Kenji wrote:

[snip]
>
>(I had just read Roderick's adventure posts the morning before I saw the
>film, and so when the crew started talking about their "grav tanks," I
>naturally pictured the Famille Spofulam variety, with the TL-9
>organ-supporting "smart-gel" applied through a rectal nozzle...  my
>sniggering gurgle made the couple sitting next to me move down a seat,
>where they stayed happily for the rest of the film.  Yes!  Spofulam, L.I.C.
>is scarier than Azathoth! <G>)
[snip]


	Gee, Kenji, you say the nicest things :).  Actually, though, the
rectally injected smart-gel idea is not mine; I lifted it from Buzz
Aldrin's _Encounter With Tiber_.

	Sniggering gurgles?  Cool.  It actually sounds like the sort of
noise a... nope, not going there :).


Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 20:07:31 -0400
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: Re: Stutterwarp & Heisenberg revisited once again ...

Garry Ward wrote:

>
>One reason that everyone what holding their breath on Sojourner's Mars
>landing was that several previous probes just stopped transmitting enroute.
>No signal, no sign, nothing.
>
>Garry


	You know, this might be due to micro-comet impact.  For those of
you who haven't been following this, there's this big controversy in the
astronomical community about this funky new class of astronomical objects
that some people are claiming to have discovered; very fluffy, house-sized
comets/snowballs.

	There are apparently very large numbers of them constantly breaking
up in Earth's upper atmosphere; while they only weigh a few tons each, at
the speeds involved one could certainly ruin a space probe's day...

	Run out and buy this month's Sky & Telescope or Astronomy for details.

Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 20:06:08 -0400
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: DMG cartoons

Paul Owensby wrote:

[snippage]
>
>P.S. While working on these two, I'm having vivid flashbacks to one of the
>cartoons in the *old* Dungeon Master's Guide that showed a bunch of
>fantasy types sitting around a table rolling dice while one of them says to
>an onlooker "It's called Papers and Paychecks; it's a great new fantasy
>role-playing game. We pretend we're workers and students in an indust-
>rialized and technological society." We're finally there :)

	Yup, I remember that one.  One of my fave cartoons ever done in a
TSR publications was one of those color strips in the back of Dragon
magazine, where they were expounding on the differences between fantasy and
SF rpgs, like where weapons come from ("Forged 10,000 years ago on the
battleground of Z'Blnith, this wand..."/"This blaster?  Sears.  23.95 on
sale.") and so forth.  Anyone remember it?


Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 20:05:53 -0400
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: Re: ARRRRGGGHH!!! Mk. II

Jay Stranahan wrote:

>
>ANY BOOK FOR DESIGNING HARDWARE THAT HAS NO SYSTEM FOR USING IT IS A
>WASTE OF TIME AND MONEY, and only a techno-game-geek locked into their
>own private litle introverted universe could possibly fail to understand
>(and hence be offended by) this. Nevermind the complexity level -- let's
>just set the whole issue of real-world complexity for real-world users
>off on the side for a minute. As is, FF&S2 is a $25 paperweight, because
>YOU CANNOT F*CKING USE WHAT YOU F*CKING BUILD. Why is that hard for
>people to grasp?


	Ahem.  I'm actually using several FF&S2 items in my current
campaign.  Not that I've actually bought it yet; I'm working from a
playtesting copy.  However, it's still quite usable, even in the
fragmentary form that I've got it in.  I'm planning on buying it in the
second printing, once the errata and typos have been fixed.




[snippage]

>Until then, I STILL quit. This broken, self-contradicting, Swiss-cheese
>excuse for an overpriced puke-ola game system will claim not one jot
>more of my time or money. This whole f*ckaround has reached such heights
>of baroque unreality that it defies description. Not only is the Emperor
>naked, but he's dead -- and instead of trying to revive the sonofabitch,
>or anoint a worthy successor (T5?), the game-nerds are dutifully
>genuflecting to the decomposing corpse.

	Dude, chill.  While the game-nerds may be genuflecting at corpses,
you're throwing a tantrum that would be more appropriate to alt.flame or a
WWIV BBS than it is the TML.

	Me?  I'm happily running a campaign, and reading the TML for
background and enjoyment.  Life's too short to get worked up like this.

Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 20:07:23 -0400
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: Re: Event Horizon

Richard Hough wrote:

>
>Yeesh. I had to specifically tell my players that technology in my campaign
>is nothing like what is shown in this movie.
>
>For example, in my campaign unpowered derelict starships cannot remain for
>days in a stable orbit inside a gas giant's atmosphere, starship bridges do
>not have glass windows which the pilot must watch out of to steer the ship,
>starships do not have so many lights on the hull they look like christmas
>trees, grav tanks are not designed to dump their occupants and a couple
>hundred gallons of fluid onto the floor of the bridge, ship damage is not
>repaired by firing automatic spearguns through the ship hull, doors do not
>go BANG! so loudly and unexpectedly the crew suffers permanent hearing
>loss, in an emergency the normal ships lights do not go out and strobe
>lights start flashing all over the place nor does the life support sytem
>start pumping out dry ice smoke, bulkheads do not have huge teeth on the
>entryways, airlocks do not require a long vocal countdown before opening,
>engine rooms have seats and control panels instead of giant spikes all over
>the place, corridors do not have revolving 'fun house' walls, the ship's
>drive is not a giant rotating armillary sphere with headlights stuck all
>over it, starships are not built of Volatile Steel (TM) which
>chain-detonates when a satchel charge is set off inside the ship. Also,
>jump space is not you-know-what.
[snip]


	Darn... you know, a ship like that could really liven up a campaign
and provide endless roleplaying opportunities.  Evenings of fun would no
doubt be had by all (I can just see Ross's face as he screams "The food
processor did WHAT!?!?").  It sounds brutally cool.  Bummer I've already
designed a ship for Beyond the Pale.  What an opportunity I missed..:(

Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 97 19:30:46 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Skill levels

On 08/21/97 at 10:24 PM,  Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca> said:

>Personally, I like the idea of skills based on the same scale as
>characteristics. Like Eris says, this means that we could have skill-only
>(Chemistry+Medical for pharmacy, for example) or characteristic-only
>(Dex+Int for a pool shot) tasks.

One of the problems I've found in adding skills and characteristics is the
effect of the outlying characteristic levels.  Very low levels (say 2 and
3) make it almost impossible to get a PC to Journeyman levels, and very
high levels (say 10+) make it impossible for a PC to NOT BE COMPETENT in
virtually every skill she learns.

For example, Jill has INT 11.  Every skill with level 1 gives her a Asset
of 12 and using 2d for Average and 2.5d for Difficult that gives her 100%
on all Average tasks and 91% on all Difficult tasks.  Jill's player will,
most likely, spread her rolls out to get lots of different skills that all
use INT as their base.  If Jill gets a skill to 4, then she will have a 31%
chance on Impossible tasks, and that is simply too high...even if Jill is a
naturally talented, well skilled character.

Ken (along with a lot of us) realize that a good way to handle this is to
extend the range of dice, dropping the 1/2 die at difficult.  I *think* we
could make:  2d-Average; 3d-Difficult; 4d-Formidable; 5d-Staggering;
6d-Hopeless work.

Now Jill's 12 gives her 100% at Average, but only 74% at Difficult, and
drops her to 2% on Impossible tasks.  Even with a skill 4, her percentages
are Diff-95%, Form-66%, Stag-31%, Impos-10%...much better, IMO.

Although, this is a good solution for our naturally talented character it
leaves characters of average and low talent in trouble.  Bob's INT is 7.  A
skill 1 gives him Aver-72%, Diff-26%, Form-5%, Stag-1%, Impos-0%, and even
a skill 4 only boosts him to Aver-97%, Diff-63%, Form-24%, Stag-6%,
Impos-1%.

Ken's solution is to multiply skill levels by 2 and extend the dice range
by one Average become 3d and Impossible becomes 7d.  This DOES work quite
well.  (Ken knows I have reservations about the details of his
implementation, but in all fairness the doubling effect works pretty well.)

As I've said, in *theory*, I'd like to get Stat and Skill on roughly the
same scales.  It looks like several others agree (and Ken does too in
effect, with skill doubling..1-6 becomes 2-12).  This implies a Stat of 7
and a Skill of 7 for an Asset of 14 for someone of Average talent and
Average skill (this *isn't* a Competent Professional PC, this is a
Journeyman), but folks I have real trouble with 14 being the mean
Asset..it's too high.  An Asset of 12 is more reasonable, and that implies
either we drop both Stat and Skill by 1 (1-11, mean 6) or accept that
skills will normally lag behind stat by a couple of points.  

I'd like us to consider the effect of changing the Characteristics range
from 2 to 12 to a lower and/or a more narrow one.  Perhaps something like 4
to 8 with a mean of 6?


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

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 97 19:33:58 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: T4.1 Skills, Craftsman

On 08/22/97 at 02:04 AM,  pawn@CAM.ORG (Glenn Grant) said:

>Can you rename "Craftsman" in T4.1? 

How about Artisan-Craft?

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

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 97 19:44:39 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: A suggestion concerning FUDGE dice

On 08/22/97 at 02:03 AM,  pawn@CAM.ORG (Glenn Grant) said:

> The trick is to keep these rules from being abused, leading to characters with > stat-F, skill-15. 

I know nobody *likes* to hear this, but we might want to consider maximum
and miniumum Stat levels for humans. Lower than the 15 we've used in the
past, and higher than 1. I've been thinking about a Stat range of 4 to 10,
and ways of getting it while keeping a bell curve around 7.  An advantage
of this would be to let the other species have different maximum/minimum
values for specific stats from the humans.

If you will consider using FUDGE dice then a mechanic of 3df+7 gives a nice
bell curve around the mean of 7. 

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

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 00:52:29 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: Marc's post.

On Fri, 22 Aug 1997 10:22:27 PDT, Charles Li wrote:

> I think the combat system is basically good, tweak and refine at will, 
> but, as mentioned before, kill the 3D max damage rule.

No, don't kill it, include a few more exceptions to the rule
(explosive ammo, energy weapons, etc).  Either that or eliminate it as
a general rule and have it apply to only those methods of attack for
which it makes more sense (300 m/s and greater projectile weapons).

James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 00:52:36 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: T4.1 Format/Presentation Idea

On Fri, 22 Aug 1997 11:18:54 PDT, Charles Li wrote:

> Just an idea for consideration by the TML:
> 
> In regards to the format of T4.1, has anyone ever seen "Advanced Squad 
> Leader" by Avalon Hill.  Their rules are quite unique, presented in a 
> format similar to the old U.S. Army manuals.
>   All the rules are written in pages that are in a nicely decorated 3 
> ring binder.  The rules themselves are colored and on good stock paper.  
> The advantages of this format is that it is amenable to revision, as 
> different subjects are divided within the binder, and that updated (and 
> errata fixed pages) are produced in a timely fashion.  New rules can be 
> added directly to the binder.
>   This format may suit T4.1 well with its extensive design options 
> (FF&S2), etc.  In addition, this would provide a more durable format 
> than the bound rulebooks that are currently produced.
> 
>   What do you all think?

You forgot to mention the disadvantage to the ASL rulebook design...
that of price ($150 CAN minimum just to *play* a game of ASL was a bit
too much for me to make the switch).

James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 00:52:44 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: Mee-too, dee-too, and wounds (was RE: Task Resolution)

On Fri, 22 Aug 1997 15:46:29 +0000, Kenneth Bearden wrote:

> Eric Jackson wrote:
> 
> > I think that wounds reducing stats is one of the best things about CT/MT/T4
> > combat rules. When you are injured you do get weaker, dizzy, etc so I find
> > it a nice simple way to simulate realistic wounds. You don't need some
> > chart to tell you after loosing 20% of your hits you are at -1, the wound
> > penalties are built in.
> 
> Exactly.  By reducing stats, you account for damage, wound effects, and
> reduced chance of success on post-wound tasks--all of this in one short,
> neat, calculation.

I couldn't agree more.  It is an elegant system.  There is no need for
additional characteristics like hit points, stun points, etc.  Hit
locations can still be used which deliver more or less damage as an
optional rule without affecting the elegancy of the basic damage
system.  And due to the fact that only one~ stat has to be reduced to
zero to render a character unconscious, the randomness of exactly
*which* stat this ends up being means that 7 points of damage (as an
example) will not always render a character unconscious (unless that
character's three primary stats are all 7).

~ I don't neccessarily believe that reducing ONE stat to zero should
render a character unconscious, however; it seems a bit too straight
forward and predictable (ie: first you are rendered unconsious, then
your wounds become severe, and then you die).  People suffer grevious
injuries or die while maintaining consciousness all the time.  Perhaps
after two stats are reduced to zero, but not after only one.


Example:
=======

One stat reduced to zero: character should consider ending the fight
   pretty quick; make an Average CON test (based on current CON-- auto
   fail if CON reduced to zero) to stay conscious each 6 second combat
   round

Two stats reduced to zero: character is unconscious; character is
   also greviously injured on a failed Average CON test (based on
   current CON-- auto fail if CON reduced to zero)

Three stats reduced to zero: character is unconsious and greviously
   injured; character is also dead on a failed Difficult CON test
   (based on normal CON)


I just came up with this on the fly so don't flame me if there are any
glaring errors :)

James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 97 18:54:45 -0600
From: Glenn Hoppe <starcity@sk.sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: What I'd like to see--Task Resolution

On 1997-08-17 13:08, Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com> posted 
the following:

>> Since that is the case, skills need to be rated more highly. Skill def
>> *needs* changing.
>
>But, I disagree here.
>
>What I am saying is this.  Yes, having more skills is a good thing, 
>but there are two ways to have more skills.
>
>Let me illustrate with an example.  Let's say a character is in a 
>career for 20 years.  By Marc's method, chargen gives him 20 skill 
>levels.  You can divide up these skill levels in two ways.

Actually, to be picky, I think Marc has said the average is more like 
1.25/year, meaning 25 skill levels over 20 years...

>You can (1):  have a character that ends up like this
>              1 level 9 skill
>              2 level 3 skills
>              5 level 1 skills
>
>Under this division, yes, you are right, skills need new definitions.
>
>
>Or you can (2):  have a character with more skills than in CT, but 
>each specific skill does not range over 6, like this
>                1 level 5 skill
>                2 level 3 skills
>                2 level 2 skills
>                10 level 1 skills

I believe there will be more level 2-4 skills than you estimate (just 
from what I've seen of 4.1 chargen)

I think it's quite possible to get higher than 5 in a skill. Are you 
suggesting that we put a cap on skills?

>Under this second choice, your character has more skills, and still 
>each specific skill does not go out of the classical range of 0-6.
>
>In this way, T4 characters can have many more separate skills than a 
>CT character, but comparing skill for skill, all T4 skills are 
>interchangealbe with CT skills.

A question that's been bugging me: WHY is this important?

Mechanics of CT and T4 are vastly different. T4 has a task system, CT had 
modifiers. T4 takes attributes into account. CT in general, didn't. T4 
even has different skills than CT.

It's /illogical/ to insist that skill level defs be the same, so that T4 
skills are interchangeable with CT skills. (geez -- I feel like Spock, 
but Illogical is the best word)

I think skill level def's need to be looked at, by an empirical study of 
what skill levels are common buy hashing through chargen, or skill def's 
need to be decided and chargen adjusted to reflect this.

>And the balance between the old and new is secured.

To reiterate: WHY?

Once a suitable skill range is decided, then CT characters can be 
converted by a simple (likely just a multiplication factor) formula. CT 
adventures need to be converted wholesale anyway, if T4's task system is 
to be used.

It may end up in the final analysis that skills do indeed average 1-6 in 
t4.1 chargen. In that case: so be it. I just don't see why it's necessary 
to assume a priori that this *needs to* be the case.

>This is what I would like to see.

I don't want to see it if it means skills have far less meaning than 
stats, or if it means skill level def's don't sync with what is possible 
with chargen.

I believe it would be far neater and tidier to have skills and 
characteristics on the same scale -- without another converting step. As 
has been stated, this makes stats and skills truly interchangeable.

('course, that's why I like FUDGE. mmmmmm fuHDge... drooool...)

gotta run. gettin' hungry.


- -- 
===== Glenn Hoppe =====\ /--- MailTo:jumpspace@geocities.com ----
\ . . Enter Jumpspace --X-> http://www.geocities.com/Area51/8275 \
 ----------------------/ \========== Eschew Obfuscation ==========

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 21:45:00 -0400
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: Rob Prior rules.

	Just finished playing around with his CSC Vehicle Design System.
While the VDS is vastly inferior to FF&S, CSC is still insanely useful; you
can bash out a quick&dirty vehicle in no time flat (well, about 10-15
minutes if you keep it simple).

	Now what the Mac-using Trav community really needs, though, is for
Rob to write up a similar application, but for FF&S2 (I'm drooling at the
thought) :).


Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 21:53:20 -0400
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: Good, bad, and evil megacorps.

Marcus Teter wrote:

>
>"Glenn Crawford" <glennc@nelvana.com> wrote:
>
>> > How about the corporate states?
>> I've always thought corps won't rule but rather abuse laws in "pisspot"
>> nations like Liberia and threaten legit nation states. Corps cannot defeat
>> even a small nation state, but they can threaten to leave and thus
>> intimidate nation states. Perhaps you should make a list of good, average
>> and mean-spirited megacorps
>
>Good idea.  I'll include it.

	In my universe Ling Standard's logo consists of 4 capital "L"'s,
all joined together at the end of the long stroke, at 90 degrees to one
another.

	Visualize it >:).

Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 97 20:21:43 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re:  Grid for Combat

On 08/22/97 at 07:09 AM,  "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net> said:

>Everybody I've heard from wants the grid back, but very few people can
>agree on the size.  *Sigh* for the Tactical Action Combat System (TACS)
>which is being written today, I'm going to put all the movement rules in
>meters per 6 second turn.  That way, you can convert to whatever grid size
>you wish.  Want 30 second turns and a 10m grid?  Simple; multipliy all AP
>costs by 5.

Doug, that's perfect for me.  I've settled on 1 meter squares/hexes for
deckplans and 6 second turns for personal combat.  I know 1.5m is CT
traditional, but I always thought the squares were a little large:

  1.5
 +---+---+
 |A  |  B|
 +---+---+
      1.5

The way I see it A and B are as much as 3 meters apart but still in
adjacent squares.  That's pretty spread out for a knife fight, not that
I've been in many knife fights.  ;-> Even if you put A and B in the middle
of their respective squares they are still 5 feet apart (1.5 meters), and
that's *still* too spread out...IMO.

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

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 97 20:10:24 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: Second careers

On 08/22/97 at 01:21 PM,  Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk> said:

>Marc Miller writes:
>>>I don't understand why you wan't to discourage players from generating
>>>characters with multiple careers. Why is that? 

>>Because people skip from career to career vicariously adventuring in the
>>pre-generation process prior to starting to adventure. 

>It's true that Traveller character generation has always been a bit of a
>game in itself. To me that has always seemed a bit of an added charm to
>it. That's true even if you only go through one career. I don't agree that
>that is a bad thing. 

>>CharGen is not intended as a substitute for adventuring; its a way of 
>>getting some experience before adventuring.

>If people enjoy creating characters, what's the harm in that? I should
>think  that would be a bonus.

Hans, I agree with both you AND Marc on this one.  On one hand, CharGen
should be fast, easy to complete, and not substitute from actually
adventuring. On the other, I've spend many evenings (when I didn't have a
group to play with) generating characters using the CT Advanced methods,
and added tables for all kinds of details, imagining the lives of the
characters I was rolling out.  Only occasionally, would one of these
characters make it into a game, but I was certainly entertained.

Perhaps, what we need here are "get the character finished and into the
game" rules in the rulebook, and a suppliment (or series of articles in
JOTAS) with more advanced rules for generating extremely detailed
characters. Not more powerful characters, but characters with more life
experiences detailed.

As for as careers are concerned, I *do* think second careers should be
allowed even in the standard rule set. More difficult, perhaps, but
allowed.   

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

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 97 22:05:13 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: What I'd like to see--Task Resolution

On 08/22/97 at 06:54 PM,  Glenn Hoppe <starcity@sk.sympatico.ca> said:

>>Under this second choice, your character has more skills, and still 
>>each specific skill does not go out of the classical range of 0-6.

>>In this way, T4 characters can have many more separate skills than a 
>>CT character, but comparing skill for skill, all T4 skills are 
>>interchangealbe with CT skills.

>A question that's been bugging me: WHY is this important?

I hope Ken answers this.  He seems absolutely *fixated* on skills being in
the 0 to 6 range.  Sure, he wants to multiply by 2 and get 2 to 12,
but...hum, maybe he has something against odd numbers.  ;->

>I believe it would be far neater and tidier to have skills and 
>characteristics on the same scale -- without another converting step. As 
>has been stated, this makes stats and skills truly interchangeable.

Me too, but I don't expect this to be the case.

>('course, that's why I like FUDGE. mmmmmm fuHDge... drooool...)

Yep, if I was comfortable using FUDGE with all the Traveller Tech, I'd
probably convert completely.

Here's my latest suggestion use 3f+7 for Stats, with no points up/down that
go outside the range of 4 to 10.  Award *2* skills per year where a skill
can't be selected/rolled more than twice per term.  Count the first 18
years as a term worth 8 skill levels.  A 20 year career yields 48 skill
levels spread across a number of skills. 

Glenn with appreciate this. ;->

 4  Terrible
 5  Poor
 6  Mediocre
 7  Fair
 8  Good
 9  Great
 A  Superb
 

Eris

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

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1733
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Saturday, August 23 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1734



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: T41 Skills Draft M Medical (out of sequence due to request)
Re: Heavy Water
Re: LaGrange Points
Re: E21 Idea (was 2047; 1.0 part 1)
Re: Silly question
Re: Zero-G Nappy Time (longish)
Re: alternate tech discussion
Re: T4.1 Format/Presentation Idea
Re: Task Resolution: Captain's Compentency
Re: Task Resolution: Captain's Compentency
Re: Virus is here!
Re: Question for Marc & a second question
Re: Task Resolution: Captain's Compentency
Re: Early Charges?
Phil Foglio
Re: Marc's post.
Re: What I'd like to see--Task Resolution
Re: T4.1 Format/Presentation Idea
Re: Marc's post.

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 20:00:53 PDT
From: "Charles Li" <chaslimd@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: T41 Skills Draft M Medical (out of sequence due to request)

Some editorializing here:

>	Medical (Physical Sciences)	Edu, Dex
>	The character is trained in the treatment of injuries and 
illnesses.=20

In the etiology and treatment of injuries.... understanding the 
mechanism of disease distinguishes paramedics (first aid) from M.D.s

>	Immediate Action. The individual knows the steps to be taken 
immediately
>upon discovering an injured or ill subject, including stabilizing the
>condition, preventing further harm under the circumstances, and 
generally
>treating major immediate symptoms.
>
>	To apply first aid (basic situation).
>	(Edu + First Aid) < Average (2D)
>	Medical may be substituted for First Aid.

Yes, medical should be able to substitue for first aid, but I wonder if 
this should be on a one for one basis or a one (medical) to two (first 
aid) ratio.... lots of docs (i.e. pathologists, internists, etc don't do 
much first aid stuff... scary isn't it?

>	To apply first aid (difficult situation).
>	(Edu + First Aid) < Difficult (2.5D)
>	Allows possibility of Spectacular Success / Failure.
>	Medical may be substituted for First Aid.
>
>	Diagnosis. The individual has been trained in, and has experience in,
>diagnosis based on apparent or reported symptoms, and on the results of
>laboratory and other tests.
>
>	To gather appropriate information about illness/injury.
>	(Edu + Medical) < Difficult (2.5D)
>	Uncertain (1D)
>
>	Treatment. The individual has been trained in, and has experience in,
>treatment of illness or injury based on a specific diagnosis.
>
>	To prescribe appropriate treatment for illness
>	(Edu + Medical) < Difficult (2.5D)
>	Uncertain (1D)
>
>	To prescribe appropriate treatment for injury
>	(Edu + Medical) < Average (2D)

This could be touchy, are we going to provide a subskill for Surgery?  
Or like in CT proclaim those docs with dex>8 surgeons?  Surgeons are 
much more adept at identifying and treating injuries (and markedly so) 
compared to their nonsurgical colleagues.

>	Default Species Specialties. By default, a character=92s medical 
ability=
> lies
>in the diagnosis and treatment of his own race (thus humans best treat
>humans; vargr best treat vargr, etc). Medical skill can be used at half 
l=
>evel
>when treating a patient outside of his species specialty. Veterinarian
>treatment (of animals) by an individual with Medical skill is also 
perfor=
>med
>at half level.
>
>	Medical is one of five members of the Physical Sciences skill cluster 
(t=
>he
>others are Biology, Chemistry, Geology, and Physics).

Hmmnn, it should almost seem that someone who takes medical skill should 
have some chemistry and biology skill as a prerequisite.... speaking 
firsthand, its not used oftern in medical practice, but they made us 
learn it in college and again in med school... part of the selection 
process I guess << sigh >>

>	Medical and First Aid are related skills. Medical covers trained 
doctors
>(and nurses) with expertise in the diagnosis and treatment of illness 
and
>injury. First Aid covers emergency treatment and immediate action by
>laypersons and paramedics.
>	Medical and Psychology are related skills. Medical covers physical 
ailme=
>nts
>(some diseases or malfunctions of the brain are physical ailments with 
me=
>ntal
>manifestations and are treated by Medical); Psychology covers mental
>ailments.

 As indicated by someone earlier, this should be Psychiatry... which 
should be treated like surgery and be made a subskill of Medicine (since 
psychiatrists are M.D.s and can pescribe drugs, and psychologists are 
Ph.D.s and can't prescribe).

>	Any level of Medical is the equivalent of First Aid-1.

   If this is so, then those who are "surgeons" should get First Aid 
skill equivalent to their surgery skill.

Feedback?

Charles Li, M.D.

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 17:07:41 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Heavy Water

In mail you write:

>         I have a quick question- could someone please explain what "heavy
> water" is and its function in atomic weapons production?  I seem to remember
> this topic coming up in the past regarding the German WWII a-bomb program.
> Any help you could offer would be greatly appreciated.

"Heavy water" is deuterium oxide (D2O). It's noticeably denser than
normal water (thus the name) and because the deuterium is heavier than
regular hydrogen, it reacts more slowly in chemical reactions. t also
causes some trouble in biovhemical reaction, thus it is classed as
somewhat toxic (really!).

It's used as a moderator in some types of nuclear reactors. That is,
it's the stuff that slows fast neutrons liberated by fission, so that
they are slow enough to induce fission easily. Another common moderator
is graphite.

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 14:53:11 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: LaGrange Points

In mail you write:

> Could some of the more astromonically minded of the TML expain what
> Trojan (LaGrange) points are and why everyone wants to put spacestations
> there....I've looked in my mechanics books and none of them give a
> definition of LaGrange points that really is all that helpful (to me).

A lot of other people have posted some good stuff, but there are a few
points they missed. First of all the "Trojan" solution requires that
the primary be at least 30 times as massive as the body orbiting it
(actually 29 and a fraction). And the bodies in the Trojan points have
to be of "negligible" mass.

Second, while the L1, L2, and L3 points *are* unstable, it is possible
to have a stable orbit *around* them, as long as it is at right angles
to the line connecting them with the center of the primary. There are
several satellites that have used this trick.

What *I* would like is a "formula" for figuring the location of L1, L2,
and L3 for any given pair of bodies...

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 16:53:48 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: E21 Idea (was 2047; 1.0 part 1)

In mail you write:

>  "Glenn Crawford" <glennc@nelvana.com> wrote:
>  
>> Quoted Section:
>> >Major Power: United States (54 States; 2 states split, 2 others join.)
>> Power lies with individual State 
>> > governments, but            trend is reversing.
>> Fair enough. What are the new states though?
>
> It really could be any.  But I know California seems to be polarizing
> North and south (so a split could happen).  Colorado seems to have similar
> rumblings (east and west slope).  Purto Rico has been a topic for
> statehood off and on over the past 20 years so it could happen in the next
> 50 years.  The last state, who knows.  I was thinking in terms of Guam,
> but it could easily be Canadian or Mexican Border states.  Also, the
> Bahamas or the Virgin Islands are not out of the question.

Don't forget that Texas still has the option (one of the conditions
made when it joined the US) of splitting into *four* seperate states.
Every once in a while this gets brought up as a way for them to get
more Senators... :-)

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 16:41:17 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Silly question

In mail you write:

> I have completely selfish reasons to ask this. One of the biggest problems
> I have had in running a good sf game was the lack of such support. Being
> none to creative myself, I had a hard time conveying to my players what it
> would be like to live in a future-tech society. What are the convieniences
> available to a person living at TL 13? Do refrigerators still use freon?
> Are there sonic showers, or do you bring (or make) a bunch of water into
> space for showers? For that matter, what *is* a sonic shower? Would it
> sound wierd?

While I keep seeing "sonic showers" in SF, I have trouble believing in
them. The "theory" is that you use ultrasonic waves to "shake loose"
the dirt and such like. I don't buy it. For one thin, dead skin
requires active measures (like a rough washcloth or a loofa) to get it
loose. Also, various skin oils and other secretions have to be removed
with water and or surfactants (soap). Finally, ultrasound doesn't
travel well through air.

Water for showers isn't all the big a problem, as humans convert food
and oxygen into water and wastes. So you'll end a trip with more water
than you started with, and water is fairly easy to recycle.

Refrigerators don't have to use freon. Freon was just a convenient gas
that has the right properties to be a good refrigerant (liquefies under
moderate pressure even in the tropics, and vaporises at normal
pressures) but unlike the older refrigerants (ammonia and chlorine)
isn't toxic.

There are thermo-electric units that use electricity *directly* to pump
heat from one side to the other. Staged, they could do the job nicely,
but they do use a *lot* more power.

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 15:07:52 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Zero-G Nappy Time (longish)

>>Well, energy wise, a zero-g bed is *expensive*. It's equivalent to
>>hauling a person 1000 miles straight up against a 1 g field (or
>>boosting them to escape velocity). 
>
> No, energy in Traveller is *cheap*, thanks to Fusion+. And as far as
> the boosting to escape velocity, I see it more as a modification of 
> contragrav, using a electronic "net" or a geodesic framework, or a 
> series of "projectors" in the wall, or whatever to produce a contragrav
> field within which the person floats. Kinda like that floating frog on
> CNN the other day, but different :)
>
>>It also gets nasty if the person
>>slips out of the bed's "field", as they'll *regain* all that energy as
>>kinetic energy. Which results in an interesting display as they turn
>>into a meteor inside the confines of their bedroom.
>
> No more so than an airraft would. If it doesn't turn into a meteor when
> its contragrav gives out a meter above the ground, why should a person?

The problem with using CG is that CG provides a force pushing up, it
doesn't neutralize gravity. Thus, the resulting bed wouldn't be "zero
G", it'd be like a waterbed or like the skydiving trainer that uses the
highspeed fan to support you in mid-air. Your weight would be
"balanced" by an upward force, rather than cancelled. The feeling is
going to be different.

>>On shipboard, for the same reasons that the ship's field doesn't extend
>>far, it's much cheaper to turn off the field (actually, since you need
>>to keep the inertial compensation, you really set it on "neutral").
>>But on planets, you have this *huge* gravity field to fight against.
>
> But we already have contragrav in the Canon :)

Sure, but it isn't anti-gravity. Anti-gravity *does* have the kind of
problems I list.

> C'mon, Leonard, quit pissing in my oatmeal :) I've already established
> on the List that I like my Traveller a bit softer than some if it means that
> my players and I can have some of the really cool things we've "seen" in
> a couple of decades of reading/watching sci-fi. We don't want 
> Teleporters or drives that go "vroooomm" in a vacuum, but we demand
> our thrustless drives and our interstellar drives and our zero-g amuse-
> ment parks. I've made my bed, you can at least let me lie in it <g>

I'd like to see a "thrustless drive". :-) 
(Perhap you meant reactionless?)

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 14:27:58 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: alternate tech discussion

In mail you write:

> At 04:44 19/08/97 PST, Leonard Erickson wrote:
>>I'd not be surprised to find an 80x86 type chip inside the room
>>thermostat, for instance. :-)
>>
>         I would. A chip in a control panel would only be part of a system.
> Eventually this would need replacing, say, the wiring, connections, etc...
> and the heaters could wear out thus precipitating renewal of the whole
> system anyway. Most rubbish you buy these days doesn't last five minutes,
> how is any of it supposed to last 100 years!

You missed my point *entirely*. It's perfectly possible that 80x86 type
chips will be part of dedicated controller units *long* into the
future. They are cheap, easy to fabricate, and the design is well
understood. 

The room thermostat will be a "dedicated controller" that interfafces
to the appropriate ship's systems.

>    As for silicon, I thought scientists had been working on other compounds
> to be used as processor bases for years. A long time ago I heard of a
> substance called gallium arsenide, that is supposed to speed up the
> electron flow, or offer less resistance to it, or something like that.

It allows faster switching speeds and thus is used in high frequency
work. It's also a lot more expensive because unlike silicon, gallium is
fairly rare.

>   Something else I once read about was that instead of the processor having
> a printed electrical circuit, all circuits would in fact be made up of
> millions of tiny laser beams, with light emitters and receivers to act as
> the connections. The advantage of this would be that as light travels much
> faster than electricity - about twice as fast I believe - the beams could
> cross each other without interfering with each other, thus ruling out the
> possibility of a short circuit and enabling all circuit paths to take a
> more direct route, speeding up processing time even more.

While photonic circuitry may be possible, anything that needs to
control *power* will have to interface with *electronic* circuitry. So
a lot of low level stuff wil be electronic, simply because it doesn't
need the speed, and does need to control electrical systems. It'll have
some sort of interface to the photonic stuff if it needs to link with it.

>      This would enable a completely different processor architecture to be
> used. It would be very different from a 80x86 type processor.

>  If we're talking about these things now, then silicon chips will be almost
> unheard of as one approaches the 22nd century. Silicon chips then will be
> as dead as something that is very dead indeed.

Why? As I said, they'll be the cheapest way of doing things that have
to control *electrical* stuff. We still use relays, even relay logic
circuits, in current equipment. And those are over 100 years old.

If you have something that works better, is cheaper, and is more
reliable, then you use that. But sometimes the old stuff works fine. 

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 23:54:01 -0400 (EDT)
From: SemoFetus@aol.com
Subject: Re: T4.1 Format/Presentation Idea

>Just an idea for consideration by the TML:

>In regards to the format of T4.1, has anyone ever seen "Advanced Squad 
>Leader" by Avalon Hill.  Their rules are quite unique, presented in a 
>format similar to the old U.S. Army manuals.
>  All the rules are written in pages that are in a nicely decorated 3 
>ring binder.  The rules themselves are colored and on good stock paper.  
>The advantages of this format is that it is amenable to revision, as 
>different subjects are divided within the binder, and that updated (and 
>errata fixed pages) are produced in a timely fashion.  New rules can be 
>added directly to the binder.

The idea makes sense, and the results could potentially be cool, but, only if it was
done right.  For example, TSR did the "Monstrous Compendium" in a similar format,
but they didn't think right.  The alphabetical order didn't flow right, and the material,
IMHO, were chintzy.  None of the advantages they claimed really worked in
practice.

So, if done right, it could be cool.  However, would it turn newer players off?  Would it
sell?  Those are the kind of things we have to ask.

Semo

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 00:22:08 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Task Resolution: Captain's Compentency

In a message dated 97-08-22 22:10:48 EDT, you write:

<< Marc, leaving aside the specific number 10 (perhaps it should be 12 or 13,
 but that's a different discussion ;-), >>

I picked S+C=10 because it produces 90% success in average task resoluttion.

Marc

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 00:22:10 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Task Resolution: Captain's Compentency

In a message dated 97-08-22 22:10:48 EDT, you write:

<<  I don't think the position of
 Captain should be limited to only expert pilots. >>

I agree. The notation of captain in the example was badly placed. Actually,
the entries after captain were blank. Pilot had entries behind it.

Marc

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 00:21:59 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Virus is here!

In a message dated 97-08-22 07:37:53 EDT, you write:

<< Virus Information
 -----------------
 Discovery Date         November, 1991
 Origin                 United States
 Length                 1,220-1,237 Bytes
 Type                   File Infector
                        Memory Resident
 Prevalence:            Rare
  >>

That's the date Marc Miller left GDW.

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 00:22:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Question for Marc & a second question

In a message dated 97-08-22 17:00:42 EDT, you write:

<< 	rolling 50 dice offers abuse by e.g use the high ones for
 	the characteristics while using the low one to boost them.
 
  >>
no no no. You roll 50 dice and record the rolls in sequence. Then the first 6
are the characteristics. The advantage is that you can waste rolls on
(attempts to enlist perhaps) that you know will fail in order to get the
right rolls (which you know are ahead in the sequence) for the attempts you
want to succeed.

Marc

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 00:01:31 -0400
From: Bill Rutherford <worj@topgun.cinecom.com>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution: Captain's Compentency

At 10:11 PM 8/22/97 EST, Eris wrote:
<SNIP>...
>...I don't think the position of
>Captain should be limited to only expert pilots..pilots can be hired. The
>Captain should be competent in something, certainly, but not necessarily
>piloting.  She could be an expert Astrogator, Sensor Operator, even an
>expert Merchant who hires the rest of her crew..don't you think?
>
>OTOH, Chief Pilot, Engineer, ect. might very well require an expert in
>certain specific skills.  
>

I've just read the first three books of the Seafort Saga, by David
Feintuch.  The series reflects closely (at least for military ships) your
comments. Sort of like the Hornblower series in space (with all of
Hornblower's meglomania, depression, and messed up head...) In the series,
the technical officers are staff - engineer, doctor, pilot, etc. The
captain is the leader who orchestrates the activities of the crew. Just
like in real life...



Bill Rutherford
worj@topgun.cinecom.com

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 02:02:19 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: Re: Early Charges?

Thomas Walter Trelenberg writes:

>I hope Traveller Chronicle, of which I believe you now said you were a
>part, has also adopted this policy.  It was a lack of this attitude
>which, after not receiving two issues and being left with no recourse
>that I dropped my subscription.  I hope that now that you are a part of
>this enterprise, you will hold to these ideals, because dependable
>support of Traveller from companies (outside IG) is very important to
>its survival.  Outside companies often provide very interesting insite
>into the platforms they support which seem to be "missed" by the
>"parent" company.  Look at DGP! :-}

   I agree completely.  The publication of material by outside companies
benefits the game (greater diversity), the game publisher (free
advertising anyone?), and the hobby in general (if for no other reason
than it takes up shelf space that a FLGS might be tempted to use for
some low-class CCG).  While it is possible to keep everything internal
(IIRC Games' Workshop works this way), small to medium-sized operations
get a tremdous benefit from licensing other vendors to produce product.

   TTC #13 is in the process of being completed (an artist for a crucial
project busted up her drawing arm if you can believe that).  Good news
on the shipping date should follow soon.  In future issues, I expect to
publish both Traveller and Marc Miller's Traveller material (we are in
need of good quality artwork and articles for both).

   As for the missing issues, send me your particulars and I'll take the
matter up with Kevin Knight, who still handles circulation matters.

Regards,

Harold

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 02:25:11 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Macpherson <john35@wharton.upenn.edu>
Subject: Phil Foglio

 
Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca> said:
>
> 	Yup, I remember that one.  One of my fave cartoons ever done in a
> TSR publications was one of those color strips in the back of Dragon
> magazine, where they were expounding on the differences between fantasy and
> SF rpgs, like where weapons come from ("Forged 10,000 years ago on the
> battleground of Z'Blnith, this wand..."/"This blaster?  Sears.  23.95 on
> sale.") and so forth.  Anyone remember it?

	YES!  It was a Phil Foglio and one of his absolute best!  
 

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 08:48:34 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: Marc's post.

> On Fri, 22 Aug 1997 10:22:27 PDT, Charles Li wrote:
> 
> > I think the combat system is basically good, tweak and refine at will, 
> > but, as mentioned before, kill the 3D max damage rule.
> 
> No, don't kill it, include a few more exceptions to the rule
> (explosive ammo, energy weapons, etc).  Either that or eliminate it as
> a general rule and have it apply to only those methods of attack for
> which it makes more sense (300 m/s and greater projectile weapons).

I agree with James here.  Originally, I didn't like the rule--but 
that was because I did not understand it.

Now that I know why it is in there, it makes much more sense to me.  
Maybe there should be some explanation as to why the 3D Max rule is 
in the rules given in the text?

Kenneth.

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

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 08:48:33 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: What I'd like to see--Task Resolution

> I believe there will be more level 2-4 skills than you estimate (just 
> from what I've seen of 4.1 chargen)

And, I'm happy with that.

> I think it's quite possible to get higher than 5 in a skill. Are you 
> suggesting that we put a cap on skills?

Nope.  I just wanted T4 skills to compatible with CT/MT skills.  Even 
in CT/MT, we occassionally saw a level 8 skill.  As long as it is 
just occassionally, I'm happy seeing level 8 skills in T4.  What I 
don't want is a character with two level 12 skills, four level 10 
skills, several level 8's, etc.

I'm very much happy with what Marc and others have posted as to how 
T4.1 characters will turn out.  I think that they are very compatible 
with CT/MT now that I've seen that.

I wish Marc would have posted that earlier.

> A question that's been bugging me: WHY is this important?

I saw Eris' post wishing that I would answer this, but the plain fact 
is that this is moot now in my book due to Marc's recent post.

I could strew you with the why's and whyfor's of my thinking on this 
matter, but it doesn't mean anything anymore because I believe that I 
am gettting what I want in T4.1 chargen.

Before, I was not sure that T4.1 would turn out that way.

> Mechanics of CT and T4 are vastly different. T4 has a task system, CT had 
> modifiers. T4 takes attributes into account. CT in general, didn't. T4 
> even has different skills than CT.

Disagreement here, but, again, discussing this is moot.

> It's /illogical/ to insist that skill level defs be the same, so that T4 
> skills are interchangeable with CT skills. (geez -- I feel like Spock, 
> but Illogical is the best word)

Is that because you're a doctor not a brick-layer?

Or is it because he's dead, Jim..uh..Glenn?

> I think skill level def's need to be looked at, by an empirical study of 
> what skill levels are common buy hashing through chargen, or skill def's 
> need to be decided and chargen adjusted to reflect this.

I'd like to see an empirical study (so that's how you spell it, eh?) 
too.

Kenneth.

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 01:29:39 PDT
From: "Charles Li" <chaslimd@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: T4.1 Format/Presentation Idea

>From owner-traveller@phaser.showcase.mpgn.com Fri Aug 22 20:50:10 1997
>Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM 
(8.7.3/8.6.9) with SMTP id VAA03340; Fri, 22 Aug 1997 21:14:40 -0400
>Received: by lists.MPGN.COM (bulk_mailer v1.5); Fri, 22 Aug 1997 
21:14:33 -0400
>Received: (from majordom@localhost) by phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM 
(8.7.3/8.6.9) id VAA03107 for traveller-outgoing; Fri, 22 Aug 1997 
21:05:53 -0400
>Received: from Mithril.MPGN.COM (Mithril.MPGN.COM [206.66.87.8]) by 
phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM (8.7.3/8.6.9) with SMTP id UAA02872 for 
<traveller@Phaser.ShowCase.MPGN.COM>; Fri, 22 Aug 1997 20:55:04 -0400
>Received: from gouda.direct.ca (gouda.direct.ca [199.60.229.9]) by 
Mithril.MPGN.COM (8.6.9/8.6.9) with ESMTP id UAA24237 for 
<traveller@MPGN.COM>; Fri, 22 Aug 1997 20:55:03 -0400
>Received: from van-as-11a13.direct.ca (van-as-11a13.direct.ca 
[204.174.245.109]) by gouda.direct.ca (8.8.5/8.8.0) with SMTP id 
RAA05870 for <traveller@MPGN.COM>; Fri, 22 Aug 1997 17:54:53 -0700 (PDT)
>From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
>To: traveller@MPGN.COM
>Subject: Re: T4.1 Format/Presentation Idea
>Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 00:52:36 GMT
>Message-ID: <34012791.18314291@mail.direct.ca>
>References: <19970822181854.11460.qmail@hotmail.com>
>In-Reply-To: <19970822181854.11460.qmail@hotmail.com>
>X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.5/32.451
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>Sender: owner-traveller@lists.MPGN.COM
>Reply-To: traveller@MPGN.COM
>

>You forgot to mention the disadvantage to the ASL rulebook design...
>that of price ($150 CAN minimum just to *play* a game of ASL was a bit
>too much for me to make the switch).
>

Well, ASL sells on the virtue of its components; a T4.1 need not be done 
in such full-colored splendor as ASL required... and the flexibility of 
the binder system favors T4.1 over a wargame such as ASL.

Charles

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 01:26:42 PDT
From: "Charles Li" <chaslimd@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Marc's post.

>From owner-traveller@phaser.showcase.mpgn.com Fri Aug 22 20:50:06 1997
>Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM 
(8.7.3/8.6.9) with SMTP id VAA03279; Fri, 22 Aug 1997 21:14:02 -0400
>Received: by lists.MPGN.COM (bulk_mailer v1.5); Fri, 22 Aug 1997 
21:13:57 -0400
>Received: (from majordom@localhost) by phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM 
(8.7.3/8.6.9) id VAA03039 for traveller-outgoing; Fri, 22 Aug 1997 
21:04:14 -0400
>Received: from Mithril.MPGN.COM (Mithril.MPGN.COM [206.66.87.8]) by 
phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM (8.7.3/8.6.9) with SMTP id UAA02870 for 
<traveller@Phaser.ShowCase.MPGN.COM>; Fri, 22 Aug 1997 20:55:03 -0400
>Received: from gouda.direct.ca (gouda.direct.ca [199.60.229.9]) by 
Mithril.MPGN.COM (8.6.9/8.6.9) with ESMTP id UAA24233 for 
<traveller@MPGN.COM>; Fri, 22 Aug 1997 20:55:01 -0400
>Received: from van-as-11a13.direct.ca (van-as-11a13.direct.ca 
[204.174.245.109]) by gouda.direct.ca (8.8.5/8.8.0) with SMTP id 
RAA05840 for <traveller@MPGN.COM>; Fri, 22 Aug 1997 17:54:47 -0700 (PDT)
>From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
>To: traveller@MPGN.COM
>Subject: Re: Marc's post.
>Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 00:52:29 GMT
>Message-ID: <340026be.18103743@mail.direct.ca>
>References: <19970822172228.2329.qmail@hotmail.com>
>In-Reply-To: <19970822172228.2329.qmail@hotmail.com>
>X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.5/32.451
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>Sender: owner-traveller@lists.MPGN.COM
>Reply-To: traveller@MPGN.COM
>
>On Fri, 22 Aug 1997 10:22:27 PDT, Charles Li wrote:
>
>> I think the combat system is basically good, tweak and refine at 
will, 
>> but, as mentioned before, kill the 3D max damage rule.
>
>No, don't kill it, include a few more exceptions to the rule
>(explosive ammo, energy weapons, etc).  Either that or eliminate it as
>a general rule and have it apply to only those methods of attack for
>which it makes more sense (300 m/s and greater projectile weapons).
>

If we make exceptions, they must be VERY clear... too many 
interpretations have arisen from the 3D rule now.... and though I tend 
to agree with the logic James uses in restricting the rule to projectile 
weapons, but as a matter of playability, who would want to use them in a 
Traveller universe if this were so???   Slug throwers would be wimpy 
weapons shunned by the serious adventurer.  I don't think wimpy slug 
throwers are what we have in mind.

Charles


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1734
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Saturday, August 23 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1735



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Marc's post.
Marc's Comments on Skill Levels (was Re: Brokers)
T4.1 Task System Debate Redux
Multiple careers
Re: Phil Foglio
Re: Marc's post.
Early Terran Battleship (HG)
Re: Task Resolution: Let's organize the discussion
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1732
Re: Task Resolution: Let's organize the discussion 1
Re: Task Resolution
Re: Rob Prior rules
Re: Grid for Combat
Rob's CSC: a TL-9 passenger hovercraft
Rob's CSC: a TL-9 APV
Rob's CSC: a TL-9 photoelectric rover
Rob's CSC: a Tl-9 attack aircraft

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 01:26:46 PDT
From: "Charles Li" <chaslimd@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Marc's post.

>From owner-traveller@phaser.showcase.mpgn.com Fri Aug 22 20:50:06 1997
>Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM 
(8.7.3/8.6.9) with SMTP id VAA03279; Fri, 22 Aug 1997 21:14:02 -0400
>Received: by lists.MPGN.COM (bulk_mailer v1.5); Fri, 22 Aug 1997 
21:13:57 -0400
>Received: (from majordom@localhost) by phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM 
(8.7.3/8.6.9) id VAA03039 for traveller-outgoing; Fri, 22 Aug 1997 
21:04:14 -0400
>Received: from Mithril.MPGN.COM (Mithril.MPGN.COM [206.66.87.8]) by 
phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM (8.7.3/8.6.9) with SMTP id UAA02870 for 
<traveller@Phaser.ShowCase.MPGN.COM>; Fri, 22 Aug 1997 20:55:03 -0400
>Received: from gouda.direct.ca (gouda.direct.ca [199.60.229.9]) by 
Mithril.MPGN.COM (8.6.9/8.6.9) with ESMTP id UAA24233 for 
<traveller@MPGN.COM>; Fri, 22 Aug 1997 20:55:01 -0400
>Received: from van-as-11a13.direct.ca (van-as-11a13.direct.ca 
[204.174.245.109]) by gouda.direct.ca (8.8.5/8.8.0) with SMTP id 
RAA05840 for <traveller@MPGN.COM>; Fri, 22 Aug 1997 17:54:47 -0700 (PDT)
>From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
>To: traveller@MPGN.COM
>Subject: Re: Marc's post.
>Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 00:52:29 GMT
>Message-ID: <340026be.18103743@mail.direct.ca>
>References: <19970822172228.2329.qmail@hotmail.com>
>In-Reply-To: <19970822172228.2329.qmail@hotmail.com>
>X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.5/32.451
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>Sender: owner-traveller@lists.MPGN.COM
>Reply-To: traveller@MPGN.COM
>
>On Fri, 22 Aug 1997 10:22:27 PDT, Charles Li wrote:
>
>> I think the combat system is basically good, tweak and refine at 
will, 
>> but, as mentioned before, kill the 3D max damage rule.
>
>No, don't kill it, include a few more exceptions to the rule
>(explosive ammo, energy weapons, etc).  Either that or eliminate it as
>a general rule and have it apply to only those methods of attack for
>which it makes more sense (300 m/s and greater projectile weapons).
>

If we make exceptions, they must be VERY clear... too many 
interpretations have arisen from the 3D rule now.... and though I tend 
to agree with the logic James uses in restricting the rule to projectile 
weapons, but as a matter of playability, who would want to use them in a 
Traveller universe if this were so???   Slug throwers would be wimpy 
weapons shunned by the serious adventurer.  I don't think wimpy slug 
throwers are what we have in mind.

Charles


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 01:39:45 -0700 (PDT)
From: "John R. Snead" <jsnead@netcom.com>
Subject: Marc's Comments on Skill Levels (was Re: Brokers)

Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com> wrote:

>CardSharks@aol.com wrote:

>> Empirical evidence from playtesting of T41 indicates that most 
>> character have skill levels between 2 and 4 for the skills that they 
>> figure are important.
>> 
>> It is a mistake to say specifically that CT skills ranged from 1 to 6 
>> and T4 (T41) skills range from 1 to 15. Skills in CT could range from 1 
>> to 15 as well.

>This is a well informed view of things that I completely agree with.  If
>T4.1 is providing skills to characters in a similar fashion as CT
>advanced chargen (mercenary, etc), then I am completely happy.
>
>Given this, skill definitions should remain the same, which is what I
>wanted in the first place.  Skill-1 is a novice;  Skill-3 is a
>professional;  Skill-5 is an expert.
>That's EXACTLY what I wanted!

I agree with this fully.  

Marc, you also mentioned how in MT and CT advanced char gen
character's received 1-1.25 skills/term and that in T4.1 they also
receive 1.25 skills/term.

If this is the case why change the skill level meanings?  In CT/MT 
Medical 3 = Doctor, naval Architect 3 = Professional.  These 
distinctions were all written down in the rules.  If character's 
receive approximately the same number of skills in 
approximately the same ranges then why change the meanings
of the skill levels?


- -John Snead jsnead@netcom.com
 

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 05:18:38 -0400 (EDT)
From: pawn@CAM.ORG (Glenn Grant)
Subject: T4.1 Task System Debate Redux

Marc,

My take on the Task System/Chargen/Skills quandary:

IF skills and stats really are going to be of equal effect in T4.1, then
you seem to have only TWO workable choices before you:

1) Redefine skill levels such that an Expert level is 7-8.
   Thus skills and stats will be on roughly the same scale. For both stats
AND skills, 3 to 4 is low, 11 or 12 is high. Anything higher is
exceptional. In this case, the Task System, which adds stat and skill,
generally does not make high-stat novices more capable than average-stat
experts. No skill multiplier is necessary.

 OR

2) Keep CT skill definitions, in which an Expert level is about 4.
   But if you go with this (as I fear you are doing) then stats are still
about twice as effective than skills. It means that 5 is a very high skill,
whereas 5 is a low stat. Thus high stats far outweigh high skills.
   If you must keep it this way, I suggest (as *strongly* as I possibly
can) that you use Ken's multiplier in the Task System. If you don't,
high-stat novices will always be able to out-do average-stat experts. And
that was what we complained was wrong with T4. We wanted that *fixed*,
right?

Right now, unfortunately, it looks like you're planning to go with 2), but
not with a skill multiplier, and I think that would result in a broken
system.

You have pointed out that T4.1 characters have a big batch of skills in the
1-4 range, with very few at 5-6, and maybe one at 7+. I got the same
results myself. But you seem to imply that skill level 4 should therefore
be considered an Expert, as it was in CT. Is this what you meant? If so, I
think this is very wrong, assuming skills and stats are supposed to be on
an equal footing.

If you go with 1), some way should be found to consolidate skill levels
during Chargen; that is, I think that T4.1 characters have too many skills
in the low 1-3 range, and not enough in the mid to high range of 4+.
Chargen is good, but it needs tweaking.

If you go with 2), then Chargen should be changed to make it harder to
achieve levels of 10 or more. If the Task System applies a multiplier to
the skill level, as in KBv2.0, such high skill levels are unnecessary, and
they produce absurdly high TNs. (Besides, if Broker-4 is an Expert broker,
what the heck is a Broker-10? Or a Broker-14 for that matter? With T4.1
Chargen, these are entirely possible.)

Personally, I don't care if you go with either of these proposals, or if
you suddenly come up with something else. Both of the above suggestions
have their merit. Either can be made to work.

But I disagree strongly with the way you're headed right now.

My main points again:

  *Please DON'T say that 4 is an Expert skill. It should be 7-8.

  *If an Expert is level 4, then use a skill multiplier in the Task System
so that skills and stats have equal effect. (i.e. TN = stat + [2 * skill])

Please consider this very carefully. We've gone over and over this, but I'm
sorry to say that you seem to be missing some important implications.

Thanks for listening,

 + GMG +



    -----------------------Glenn Grant-----------------------  
                         <pawn@cam.org>
    Web: <http://helios.physics.utoronto.ca:8080/ggrant.html>
"Nature abhors normality. It can't go too long without a mutant."
                        --Dr Blockhead

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 22:26:51 +1200
From: Andrew Moffatt-Vallance <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Multiple careers

I've read all the points regarding multiple careers and I think I have
something to add. Speaking from a sociological PoV most people do generally
have two (and only two) careers, in western societies the changeover usually
occurs in your 30's or 40's (in societies with shorter life expectancies it
comes sooner). What most people are confusing as career changes are actually
simple job changes. In a career change the entire focus of the persons life
changes, generally requiring learning entirely new skills; in a job change the
same skills are used, but in a different way. For example Phil trains at
collage as an engineer. After graduating Phil is employed in several jobs,
designing pumps, teaching at a small university, junior manager in a
construction company. These are not career changes, as Phil is using and
improving in the same general group of skills in each job (Phil can be regarded
as either a bureacrat or scholar at this time). Later, Phil has settled,
established a comfortable asset base, married; basically achieved a solid
degree of security in life. What generally hapens at this point is that Phil
will start to question his career path, "Is this what I want to be doing"
(the classic "mid life crisis"). It is at this point that Phil may well change
career, branching out in an entirely new direction giving more satisfaction.
In Traveller, at this point Phil chooses to become an adventurer. The only real
exception to this general pattern is military service. It is not uncommon for
the first "term" after collage to be spent in the military. This can either be
compulsary military service (as in much of Europe) or simply a cultural
imperative (such as in Japan and parts of the US). This is more a "rite of
passage" than a "career". Unusually, this process and pattern appears in
virtually all Human cultures, with the time frame compressed or expanded in
proportion to the average life expectancy.

So I'd say, for Humans, the one career rule is a good one. With the possible
exception of a first term in the military, but only if the character does not
choose the military as a career. I think people are failing to recognise the
basic flexibility of the Char gen process. A single "career" can represent
a whole lot of options. Most of them cover a whole range of employment options,
and can easily accommodate most of the job changes that people are confusing
with career changes.

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

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

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 08:23:13 -0400
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: Re: Phil Foglio

John MacPherson wrote:

>
>Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca> said:
>>
>> 	Yup, I remember that one.  One of my fave cartoons ever done in a
>> TSR publications was one of those color strips in the back of Dragon
>> magazine, where they were expounding on the differences between fantasy and
>> SF rpgs, like where weapons come from ("Forged 10,000 years ago on the
>> battleground of Z'Blnith, this wand..."/"This blaster?  Sears.  23.95 on
>> sale.") and so forth.  Anyone remember it?
>
>	YES!  It was a Phil Foglio and one of his absolute best!
>


	Do you remember any of the other panels?  I remember the one about
what characters do when NPC's sell them a defective sundial/wristwatch; for
the fantasy RPG's it was hold up the vendor at daggerpoint.  For the SF
games it was blow up the planet.  Illustrated the difference in oomph
available quite nicely...

Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 08:49:40 -0400
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: Re: Marc's post.

Kenneth Bearden wrote:

>
>> On Fri, 22 Aug 1997 10:22:27 PDT, Charles Li wrote:
>>
>> > I think the combat system is basically good, tweak and refine at will,
>> > but, as mentioned before, kill the 3D max damage rule.
>>
>> No, don't kill it, include a few more exceptions to the rule
>> (explosive ammo, energy weapons, etc).  Either that or eliminate it as
>> a general rule and have it apply to only those methods of attack for
>> which it makes more sense (300 m/s and greater projectile weapons).
>
>I agree with James here.  Originally, I didn't like the rule--but
>that was because I did not understand it.
>
>Now that I know why it is in there, it makes much more sense to me.
>Maybe there should be some explanation as to why the 3D Max rule is
>in the rules given in the text?


	In the kitbashed set of combat rules that I use, I put the limit at
4 dice and apply it only to non-HE slugthrowers.  Everything else does its
rated damage.  So basically, it's an exception to the rule rather than a
rule with a vast majority of exceptions.

	And I like the idea of lethal combat rules: I also use Glenn
Grant's hit location table, so sometimes the wound will kill if not treated
immediately.  When combined with multiple damage on called shots, it'll
probably make the first real balanced combat I throw at them into a killer
(so far, Rye-Ben terrorists armed with Bullpup-9's and nukes don't count).
It keeps the game rational, because people know that getting shot can kill
the character dead on the spot, just like IRL.  Saves things from
degenerating into the adolescent "The dentist's receptionist told me I'll
have to wait ten minutes?  I shoot her!" sort of silliness.

On the same topic, Charles Li wrote:

>
>If we make exceptions, they must be VERY clear... too many
>interpretations have arisen from the 3D rule now.... and though I tend
>to agree with the logic James uses in restricting the rule to projectile
>weapons, but as a matter of playability, who would want to use them in a
>Traveller universe if this were so???   Slug throwers would be wimpy
>weapons shunned by the serious adventurer.  I don't think wimpy slug
>throwers are what we have in mind.


	Well, basically, because this is the Far Future, and lasers and
plasma guns are highly funky technotoys that add a certain amount of
flavour and colour and extreme lethality?  Besides, as I formulate it, the
rule doesn't apply to explosive rounds; so snub pistols are still viable,
and larger-bore weapons firing explosive rounds are still plenty nasty.
Assuming I ever have time enough to ref much Traveller again, I think I'll
have personal weaponry gradually shifting to lasers and gauss weapons as
the Imperium moves up in TL.  At first, I was surprised to see that Trav
still used slugthrowers at higher TL's, but after reading why in FF&S1, and
running a few designs, it made a certain amount of sense to me...

Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

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

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 01:31:25 +1200
From: Andrew Moffatt-Vallance <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Early Terran Battleship (HG)

Well, under High Guard you can design a ship with a factor-B spinal
particle accelerator at TL 9. The stats are as follows:

Battleship BB-J4117C3-080000-60B04-0 MCr 10,925.915  9900T
batt bear              4     1 1 1                   Crew=133
batt                   4     1 1 1                   TL=9
Passengers=0 Low=140 Cargo=15 Fuel=1683 EP=693 Agility=1
Ships Troops=10 Craft=2 armed barges

Barge      WG-0602211-000000-00002-0 MCr 10.795      20T
batt bear                        1                   Crew=2
batt                             1                   TL=9
Couches=21 Cargo=0.3 Fuel=1 EP=0.4 Agility=2

Not exactly the most formidable warships ever designed, but they will fly.
Still, I think they're interesting.

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

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

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 09:47:16 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Task Resolution: Let's organize the discussion

In a message dated 97-08-23 01:47:09 EDT, you write:

<< 
 I'm going to assume (I know the joke ;-) that you have firmly decided on
 mechanic 2, and T4.1 will use a variable number of dice...Please correct me
 if I'm wrong...and suggest that the next topic to be discussed should be
 what you have termed Competency Levels.  Not how many dice!  Not half dice!
 Not the range of skills or characteristics!
  >>

I would love to have this discussion (based on the Task Chapter draft). I'll
email that chapter to anyone who wants it. 

Frankly, writing tasks for the skills in the next chapter gives great insight
into what tasks need to do. So does re-reading the Fighting chapter in T4 and
trying to translate the implied tasks into standard notation.

BTW, the latest draft switches the < to >. Its still not right technically (>
should really be =>) but I am not inclined to change that.

Please address requests for the task chapter to FarFuture@aol.com and put
Task Chapter Request in the subject. I get to them faster that way.

Marc

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

Date: 23 Aug 1997 13:39:10 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1732

>Let's not focus on the "equal 10 or more part yet", but on the "90th
>percentile" for average tasks.
>
>I would contend that a truly competent person should succeed on Average
>tasks almost 100% of the time, and on Difficult tasks around 75% of the
>time.
[table snipped]
>I would further contend that NO Beginner (no matter how naturally talented)
>should have a better chance of success than a Competent Professional of
>*average* natural ability.  OTOH, a naturally talented Beginner should have
>as good (or even a better) chance of success than a Journeyman of average
>natural ability.
>
>What do others think?

Sounds OK to me.  In fact, I like it better than the 'official' levels, but
from what I hear of the new task system (and skill levels) Marc likes
something different.

Oh well, looks like I'm going to be following Marc's advice and modifying
rules (like the task system) to better suit my players.

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 09:47:13 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Task Resolution: Let's organize the discussion 1

In a message dated 97-08-23 01:47:09 EDT, you write:

<< 
 >No - *you* define Highly Skilled; you're writing the task system and 
 >character generation system. 
  >>

True. I am writing it. I find that checking my work against the criticism
helps me fine tune the final text.

1. There are some people I will never win over. More than that, their
criticisms keep coming back. I was motivated in this round to speak up again
when the post stated that I had made the new range of skills 1-15 (average
7), putting some set of words in my mouth. I was trying to establish the
foundations everyone thought were there, and what the criticisms were.

2. I am currently writing the text of Skills, which should (and does) include
task examples. Writing sample tasks for every single skill shows the wide
variety of tasks available.

For example, it is clear that there have to be tasks with skill only (no
characteristics). There have to be tasks with characteristics only (no
skill). There have to be tasks with skill possible but optional. Then there
are Uncertain, Hasty, etc etc.

Marc

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 09:47:18 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

In a message dated 97-08-23 01:34:53 EDT, you write:

<< 
 Given this information, based on Marc's empiracle (how do you spell that
 word anyway?) evidence, we don't need new skill definitions.
>>

If definitions means saying Skill-1 is this, Skill-2 is that, then that's
true.

On th eother hand, when a whole text of Electronics is

"Nearly anyone can wire a light to a battery, but dealing with electronic
devices is an entirely different matter. A person with this skill has
expertise in the operation and repair of such equipment. Electronics skill
allows a character to understand, manipulate, assemble, and fix complex or
even alien electronic devices. Obviously, some rolls will be harder than
others, and many may be impossible without sufficient tools.
        Education is normally the attribute associated with this skill, but
Intelligence may be of more assistance when dealing with alien devices or
malfunctions of an unusual nature."

and half the text is taken up saying maybe you could use Edu or Int to help
you, I think we need new skill texts... including example tasks, discussion
of several areas where Electronics can be applied like,

	Diagnosis of Faults.
	Repair and Maintenance.
	Equipment Design (Modular).
	Equipment Design (Custom).

etc.

Marc

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

Date: 23 Aug 1997 13:48:39 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: Rob Prior rules

>	Now what the Mac-using Trav community really needs, though, is for
>Rob to write up a similar application, but for FF&S2 (I'm drooling at the
>thought) :).

I'm working on it.  Early completion of this project would be greatly
enhanced by large and regular contributions of money.

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

Date: 23 Aug 1997 13:54:33 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: Grid for Combat

>> I'm going to put all the movement rules in
>>meters per 6 second turn.  That way, you can convert to whatever grid size
>>you wish.

Excellent idea.  I'd doing all my deck plans at 2m per inch so they look OK
with 25mm figures, but with the choice of 1" or 0.75" grid overlays (for 2m
squares and 1.5m squares respectively).

>Even if you put A and B in the middle
>of their respective squares they are still 5 feet apart (1.5 meters), and
>that's *still* too spread out...IMO.

No, not until the final closing.  The knife fights I've seen (admittedly not
many) have been mostly circling matches until a final tangle.  4-6 feet
sounds about right.

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 10:25:01 -0400
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: Rob's CSC: a TL-9 passenger hovercraft

	A TL-9 passenger hoverferry... which took me all of 20 minutes to
do, from idea to export via Navigator.  This program rules.  Anyhow this is
the last design for this AM; my girlfriend just woke up and we're heading
out to have some breakfast.  I might post some more this afternoon.




                    Maaliikaan Commuter hovercraft (TL9)

                          Designed by R.D.Elliott

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

Summary:
     12.00 displacement ton box; 45.6 tonnes; kCr 714
Chassis:
     168 kL box (8.6 m long x 4.4 m wide x 4.4 m high); Structure: 7.07
     tonnes of light alloy, body 0.09 cm thick, 1 armour rating
Performance:
     Primary: 5.00 MW TL8 Turbine, MHD power plant; Fuel: 8.00 kL of
     high-grade hcarb (8.00 tonnes), 16 hours supply Secondary: 2x 160 kW
     TL9 Storage Bank power plants
     Propulsion System: 5.00 MW hoverskirt with ; Maximum Speed: 188 km/h;
     Range: 3001 km; Agility: +3DM
Crew & Passengers:
     Crew roster: driver, Navigator, 2 Stewards, Engineer; 5 crew stations;
     60 roomy passenger seats
Communications:
     Subregional Radio (1 W, TL9, DirFnd)
Sensors:
     Active Subregional Radar (100 W) Resolution: 2.0 cm per km of range
     Active Subregional Sonar (100 W) Resolution: 2.0 cm per km of range
Other:
     11.3 kL of cargo space

Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 10:03:33 -0400
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: Rob's CSC: a TL-9 APV

	Here's yet another TL-9 vehicle designed for use in my campaign;
it's the standard APV used by the Maaliikaan armed forces.  Visualize a
standard APC with a single turret mounting an autocannon and a coaxial
medium machinegun, with 5 missiles mounted on one side.  The armour is
extremely heavy; I may sacrifice some for performance in a later version.


                              Maaliikaan APV (TL9)

                          Designed by R.D.Elliott

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

Summary:
     5.00 displacement ton box streamlined; 108 tonnes; MCr 1.80
Chassis:
     70.0 kL box streamlined (6.4 m long x 3.3 m wide x 3.3 m high);
     Structure: 5.26 tonnes of hard steel, body 2.0 cm thick
     Armour: 17 front (10 cm, moderate slope), 14 sides (8.0 cm), 14 rear
     (8.0 cm), 14 top (8.0 cm), 15 bottom (10 cm)
Performance:
     Primary: 2.00 MW TL7 Turbine, Gas power plant; Fuel: 2.70 kL of
     high-grade hcarb (2.70 tonnes), 9 hours supply Secondary: 40.0 kW TL9
     Storage Bank power plant
     Propulsion System: 2.00 MW tracks; Maximum Speed: 43 km/h; Range: 394
     km; Agility: +3DM
Crew & Passengers:
     Crew roster: driver, Commor, Backup driver; 3 crew stations; 10 roomy
     passenger seats
Armament:
             Weapon          Damage    Range Shots Reloads    Notes
      Autocannon, Light-8 	9           Long                +3DM, remote
      Machinegun, Medium-8	5           Long                +3DM, coaxial
      Missile, Light-8    	22 (14 exp) Medium              +4DM, coaxial
Communications:
     Regional Radio (1.00 kW, TL9, MilSpec, DirAnt, DirFnd)
Sensors:
     Active Subregional Optical (100 W, MilSpec) Resolution: 5.0 mm per km
     of range
     Active Regional Radar (1.00 kW, MilSpec) Resolution: 2.0 cm per km of
     range
Other:
     7.89 kL of cargo space

Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 09:52:36 -0400
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: Rob's CSC: a TL-9 photoelectric rover

	Here's another vehicle, designed for my campaign.  It's intended
for use on two small inner planets in the system the PC's are currently in.
On those worlds, there are several research stations and a whole bunch of
boost lasers for solar sail carft.  This vehicle was designed for use in
that environment; the solar panels will be providing much more power, given
that they're operating in a vaccuum environment with greater insolation.
As well, the chassis is stressed to 0.5 G's IIRC to take advantage of the
lower gravity.

	Something that should be noted is that the fact that the propulsion
system is designed for adverse conditions, and is reflected in the
spreadsheet view, but it doesn't appear in the descriptive notes view,
which is what you're seeing here.

                          TL-9 electric rover (TL9)

                          Designed by R.D.Elliott

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

Summary:
     1.90 displacement ton box; 26.4 tonnes; kCr 151
Chassis:
     26.6 kL box (4.6 m long x 2.4 m wide x 2.4 m high); Structure: 301 kg
     of light composite, body 0.10 cm thick, 2 armour rating
Performance:
     Primary: 2.37 MW TL9 Storage Bank power plant Secondary: 14.5 kW TL9
     Photoelectric power plant
     Propulsion System: 560 kW wheels with ; Maximum Speed: 40 km/h; Range:
     0 km; Agility: +3DM
Crew & Passengers:
     Crew roster: driver; 1 crew station; 3 roomy passenger seats
Communications:
     Regional Radio (10 W, TL9, SmVcl)
     Subcontinental Maser (10.00 kW, TL9, SmVcl, MilSpec)
Sensors:
     Passive Subregional Optical (1 W) Resolution: 5.0 mm per km of range
     Active Subregional Radar (100 W) Resolution: 2.0 cm per km of range
Other:
     Options: entertainment centre
     Safety Features: anti-hijack system, anti-theft system, fire
     suppression system
     trailer hitch for 5.00 tonnes; 1.97 kL of cargo space

Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 10:09:07 -0400
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: Rob's CSC: a Tl-9 attack aircraft

	Yet another vehicle done for my campaign; an attempt to do
something vaguely A-10-like at TL-9.  The ammo export bug does not reflect
the fact that it has 10 missiles overall and 4 bombs.


                            Attack aircraft (TL9)

                          Designed by R.D.Elliott

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

Summary:
     2.50 displacement ton cylinder airframe; 22.6 tonnes; MCr 11.6
Chassis:
     35.0 kL cylinder airframe (8.1 m long x 2.4 m wide x 2.4 m high,
     wingspan 10 m); Structure: 664 kg of light composite, body 0.25 cm
     thick, 3 armour rating
Performance:
     Primary: 8.60 MW TL8 Turbine, MHD power plant; Fuel: 3.87 kL of
     high-grade hcarb (3.87 tonnes), 4 hours supply Secondary: 124 kW TL9
     Storage Bank power plant
     Propulsion System: 8.60 MW high performance aircraft with STOL
     capability; Maximum Speed: 1516 km/h, Take-Off Speed: 212 km/h; Range:
     6795 km; Agility: +2DM
Crew:
     Crew roster: pilot, gunner; 2 crew stations with ejection seats (1.0 cm
     of Composite Laminate armour, rating 7)
Armament:
            Weapon          Damage    Range  Shots Reloads    Notes
      Autocannon, RF Lt-89           Long          0      +3DM, remote
      Missile, Light-8   22 (14 exp) Medium               +3DM, remote
      Missile, Light-8   22 (14 exp) Medium               +3DM, remote
      Bomb, Unguided-5   55 exp      Contact              1 gunner
Communications:
     Subcontinental Radio (10.00 kW, TL9, MilSpec, DirAnt, DirFnd)
     Subcontinental Laser (10.00 kW, TL9, SmVcl, MilSpec)
     Subregional Maser (100 W, TL9, SmVcl, MilSpec)
     Subregional Jammer (100 W, TL9, MilSpec, DirAnt, DirFnd)
Sensors:
     Passive Subregional Optical (1 W, MilSpec) Resolution: 5.0 mm per km of
     range
     Active Regional Radar (1.00 kW, MilSpec) Resolution: 2.0 cm per km of
     range
     Active Subregional Jammer (200 W, MilSpec, DispArray, MultArray)
     Resolution: 1.0 mm per km of range
Other:
     26 mL of cargo space

Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1735
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Saturday, August 23 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1736



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Rob Prior's CSC ute; some designs.
Rob's CSC: a TL-9 wet-naval vessel
Re: T4.1 Format/Presentation Idea
Re: Starship Combat, the Good Old Days Era
Re: Competency Levels
Re: Mee-too, dee-too, and wounds (was RE: Task Resolution)
Re: RoM/Terran TL
Re: Skills and Tech Levels
Re: T41 Skills Draft
Re: Anagathics
Re: That DAMNED Half Die!
Re: Task Resolution: Let's organize the discussion
Re: T4.1 Task System Debate Redux
Re: T4.1 Format/Presentation Idea 
2047; 1.1 part 1
2047; 1.1 part 2
Rob's CSC: a TL-9 Assault hovercraft
Re: New Proposal for the RoM TL Debate

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 09:26:43 -0400
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: Rob Prior's CSC ute; some designs.

	The following are a few vehicle designs I threw together using
Rob's little CSC utility.  It's absolutely great; it permits endless
finetuning in order to tweak a given vehicle.  While it also reveals the
VDS's shortcomings compared to FF&S2, the fact that it's a lot faster means
that I'm going to be using it a lot in my campaign.

	Personally, I think that it's much more convenient than a
spreadsheet (I don't keep one on my machine because I never use it and the
HD space is better devoted to other things.  It's a great piece of
software; small, convenient, insanely useful, does exactly what it's
supposed to do.

	It also highlights how insanely useful a similar series of little
apps using the FF&S2 formulae (such as one for the CPR and gauss small arms
sequences, one for starships, one for vehicles, one for aircraft, etc)
would be.  However, I'm going to stop badgering Rob now and just start
posting some designs:



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

                         Gas turbine car, TL-9 (TL9)

                          Designed by R.D.Elliott

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

Summary:
     0.75 displacement ton open-topped box streamlined; 6.15 tonnes; kCr
     77.1
Chassis:
     10.5 kL open-topped box streamlined (3.4 m long x 1.8 m wide x 1.8 m
     high); Structure: 1.11 tonnes of composite laminate, body 0.50 cm thick
     Armour: 3 front (2.0 cm), 3 sides (1.0 cm), 3 rear (1.0 cm), 0 top
     (0.50 cm), 5 bottom (0.50 cm)
Performance:
     Primary: 800 kW TL7 Turbine, Gas power plant; Fuel: 600 L of high-grade
     hcarb (600 kg), 5 hours supply Secondary: 148 kW TL9 Storage Bank power
     plant
     Propulsion System: 800 kW wheels; Maximum Speed: 164 km/h; Range: 819
     km; Agility: +3DM
Crew & Passengers:
     Crew roster: driver; 1 crew station; 5 cramped passenger seats
Communications:
     Subregional Radio (1 W, TL9, SmVcl)
Sensors:
     No sensors installed.
Other:
     Options: automatic sunroof, entertainment centre
     Safety Features: anti-hijack system, anti-theft system, Roadgrid, fire
     suppression system
     trailer hitch for 5.00 tonnes; 724 L of cargo space

Designer's notes: This seems to illustrate the sort of vehicle Greg Porter
optimized the system for.  The speed seems to be pretty much what it
should.  The armour values (which I forgot to adjust downwards) are a relic
of this thing's original vocation, which was a jeep-like military vehicle.




Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 09:32:52 -0400
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: Rob's CSC: a TL-9 wet-naval vessel

	Here's another vehicle design done using Rob's CSC; the maximum
speed appears to be totally porked on this one.  I'd also like to make
three minor bug reports; firstly, exporting as Mac or PC text results in an
empty file; I had to export these as .html, open them in Navigator, save
them as text, and then open, edit, cut and paste. Secondly, the ammunition
load included with the weapon does not appear in the exported file.
Thirdly; under communicators, all the available empty slots appear in the
exported file as "()available"; I edited those out.

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

                        Maaliikaan Patrol boat (TL9)

                          Designed by R.D.Elliott

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

Summary:
     325.00 displacement ton cylinder streamlined; 3897 tonnes; MCr 12.1
Chassis:
     4550 kL cylinder streamlined (41 m long x 11 m wide x 11 m high);
     Structure: 38.10 tonnes of hard steel, body 1.3 cm thick
     Armour: 9 front (2.6 cm, moderate slope), 8 sides (2.6 cm), 8 rear (2.5
     cm), 7 top (2.3 cm), 8 bottom (2.8 cm); Stealth Structure: -3DM against
     TL9- military and TL10- civilian sensors
Performance:
     Primary: 45.2 MW TL5 Turbine, Steam power plant, water-cooled; Fuel:
     2584 kL of hydrocarbons (2584 tonnes), 800 hours supply
     Secondary: 10x4.00 MW TL9 Storage Bank power plants
     Propulsion System: 45.0 MW high performance watercraft; Maximum Speed:
     17 km/h; Range: 13964 km; Agility: +3DM
Crew & Passengers:
     Crew roster: helmsman, 6 gunners, Captain, 3 Navigators, 25 Assorted
     Swabs; 36 crew stations; 36 roomy passenger seats
Armament:
             Weapon          Damage     Range   Shots Reloads     Notes
      Cannon, Heavy-8     19 (17 exp) Very Long       0      +3DM, 1 gunner
      Cannon, Heavy-8     19 (17 exp) Very Long       0      +3DM, 1 gunner
      Missile, Heavy-8    34 (22 exp) Long                   +4DM, remote
      Autocannon, RF Lt-8 9           Long            0      +4DM, remote
      Autocannon, Light-8 9           Long                   +3DM, remote
      Autocannon, Light-8 9           Long                   +3DM, remote
      Machinegun, Medium-85           Long            0      1 gunner
      Machinegun, Medium-85           Long            0      1 gunner
      Machinegun, Medium-85           Long            0      1 gunner
      Machinegun, Medium-85           Long            0      1 gunner

Communications:
     Continental Radio (100 kW, TL9, MilSpec, DirAnt, DirFnd)
     Regional Radio (1.00 kW, TL9, MilSpec, DirAnt, DirFnd)
     Regional Laser (1.00 kW, TL9, SmVcl, MilSpec)
     Continental Maser (100 kW, TL9, SmVcl, MilSpec)
     Regional Jammer (1.00 kW, TL9, MilSpec, DirAnt, DirFnd)
Sensors:
     Passive Regional Optical (10 W, MilSpec) Resolution: 5.0 mm per km of
     range
     Active Subcontinental Radar (20.0 kW, MilSpec, DispArray, MultArray)
     Resolution: 1.0 mm per km of range
     Passive Subcontinental Radar (200 W, MilSpec, DispArray, MultArray)
     Resolution: 1.0 mm per km of range
     Active Regional Radar (1.00 kW, MilSpec) Resolution: 2.0 cm per km of
     range
     Active Regional Sonar (1.00 kW) Resolution: 2.0 cm per km of range
     Passive Subcontinental Sonar (100 W) Resolution: 2.0 cm per km of range
Other:
     Options: entertainment centre, recreation space, kitchen for 18
     simultaneous meal
     Safety Features: anti-hijack system, anti-theft system, fire
     suppression system
     Construction Equipment: crane can lift 18.0 tonnes
     988 kL of cargo space


Designer's notes: A typical naval patrol vessel found on Maaliikaa, a
waterworld in my campaign.  I'd apreciate comments from any of you naval
types out there.

Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 07:26:00 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: T4.1 Format/Presentation Idea

At 07:32 PM 8/22/97 -0400, you wrote:
>Bruce Johnson wrote:
>
>> There was consdiderable discussion of this format when T4 was first being
>> discussed, the consensus ended up being (after some input from people
>> ewho've actually _produced_ such things) that it was expensive, and people
>> who are in the RPG market nowadays seem to want glossy covered expensive
>> books rather than a three ring binder, the usual triumph of style over
>> utility...(how else to account for such monstrosities as the Lincoln 4x4)
>> 
>
>Yes, but many of the books on the market include nice three-ring
>punched holes.  Why not make a binder available (a nice D ring
>binder at that) with a really good cover insert and back insert.
>Maybe just the plain old Red/Black Classic Traveller "Traveller" 
>and "Starship Beowulf" blurb.
>
>After all, IG has invested in the much less useful hardcover.  Why not
>a binder. I guess this could cause some assemply problems for the 
>binder inserts if you also wanted to market them as a paperback so this
>could, in fact, pose a problem.

Columbia Games is learning that the added expense hurts sales.. HarnMaster
II is a very slow seller (even for Harn stuff) since th cost of the heavy
paper stock and the binder drove the basic rules to near $50.
- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer to the Earth."                  |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 07:23:46 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Starship Combat, the Good Old Days Era

At 03:21 PM 8/22/97 -0700, you wrote:

>Aaaaah...LBB 2 starship combat...now *that* was a system!  Triple-weapon
>turrets, beam lasers, a movement system based on thumbtacks and standard
>metric string-lengths...and best of all, a distance scale in which planets
>were *big*, like 10 cm across or so.  Never mind that prudent starship
>pilots feared enemy missile fire far less than the dreaded (and all too
>common) Flying Off the Edge of the Desk...and spoke in hushed whispers of
>the still more horrifying Cat Walking Around on the Desk.

Ah, yes.. Kitty, the Great Galactic Ghoul of the Spinward Marches..

>(So, Douglas...what *did* become of the battered but glorious Really Big
>Desk, site of so many random corsair encounters?)

When we moved up to the City, no one wnated to take the desk, so we cut it
up with a chainsaw and threw *very* large pieces of the third floor
balcony.  Great fun.  Especially explaining to the cops what was going on
with a chainsaw in my hands....
- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer to the Earth."                  |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 07:04:25 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Competency Levels

At 06:11 PM 8/22/97 -0500, Eris wrote:

>Let's not focus on the "equal 10 or more part yet", but on the "90th
>percentile" for average tasks.
>
>I would contend that a truly competent person should succeed on Average
>tasks almost 100% of the time, and on Difficult tasks around 75% of the
>time.

I shy away from any statement that somebody will succeed 100% of the time.
There is always the chance of failure.

>I would further contend that NO Beginner (no matter how naturally talented)
>should have a better chance of success than a Competent Professional of
>*average* natural ability.  OTOH, a naturally talented Beginner should have
>as good (or even a better) chance of success than a Journeyman of average
>natural ability.

I would agree, except for the fact that the first time I fired a M-16 for
qualification I hit 39 out of 40 targets.  This was with 2 weeks experience
with the weapon.  It's fairly obvious that I shot better than 90% of the US
Army based on my natural ability.  

One thing that's been missed in this debate is that aging tends to take
care of the uber-character's physical stats.  Stick around long enough and
you'll have great skills and low characteristics.  As for INT and EDU, I've
rarely seen players devote themselves to pushing those characteristics up
unless it was appropriate for the character's conception.


- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer to the Earth."                  |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 07:17:38 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Mee-too, dee-too, and wounds (was RE: Task Resolution)

At 12:52 AM 8/23/97 GMT, you wrote:

<Discussion of wounds effects on stats snipped>

>I couldn't agree more.  It is an elegant system.  There is no need for
>additional characteristics like hit points, stun points, etc.  Hit
>locations can still be used which deliver more or less damage as an
>optional rule without affecting the elegancy of the basic damage
>system.  And due to the fact that only one~ stat has to be reduced to
>zero to render a character unconscious, the randomness of exactly
>*which* stat this ends up being means that 7 points of damage (as an
>example) will not always render a character unconscious (unless that
>character's three primary stats are all 7).

I'm including a hit location system as an optional rule on TACS (which
should be done today, BTW), some people really want one, some people think
it slows the game down too much.

>~ I don't neccessarily believe that reducing ONE stat to zero should
>render a character unconscious, however; it seems a bit too straight
>forward and predictable (ie: first you are rendered unconsious, then
>your wounds become severe, and then you die).  People suffer grevious
>injuries or die while maintaining consciousness all the time.  Perhaps
>after two stats are reduced to zero, but not after only one.

In TACS, when one stat is reduced to zero, you need to make a task roll
every turn to stay conscious.  When two stats reach zero, this task becomes
very difficult, and has to be attempted for every action you try.  (ie, you
crawl 2 meters and try to fire a shot.. you'd have to roll to avoid passing
out three times.) If you get down to zero on all three physical
cahracteristics, say goodnight, Gracie!  You are greviously wounded, and
have only minutes before you bleed to death.

Wounds also deteriorate under my new system, so PCs with First Aid will
have something to do. 

- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer to the Earth."                  |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 97 16:16 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: RoM/Terran TL

In-Reply-To: <9708192121.AA22956@eggneb.astro.ucla.edu>

Bruce,

> (Does anyone with access to Supplement 10 remember if there were any TL-15
> worlds on the Solomani side of the border even in 1107?)

Don't have it handy, but I'm 99% sure no.
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 97 16:16 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: Skills and Tech Levels

In-Reply-To: <9708200005.AA46430@st6000.sct.edu>

Franklin,

> Instead of using the exact Tech *Level*, consider using the Tech Level
> *Range*; i.e., "Mechanic/Ind", "Electronics/PreStel", "Computer/HiStel",
> etc.  Since the Tech Level Chart lists "bands" or "ranges" for the Tech
> Levels *already*, this would sufficiently restrict skills to a TL-range
> while still allowing some versatility.  
>  
> (BTW, the above example skills were Mechanic for "Industrial" TLs,
> Electronics for "Pre-Stellar" TLs, and Computer for "High Stellar" TLs.)  
>  
> Comments, anyone?

Brilliant idea! (I just suggested the same thing!)
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 22:16:37 -0800
From: Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca>
Subject: Re: T41 Skills Draft

>BTW, I'm not gonna push for it's inclusion, but Scrounging is an important
>skill that isn't listed. It's not really Admin, nor Trade or Broker (the
>way they are defined), but characters are *always* Scrounging around for
>something or other.  ;->

You got Scrounging too, eh? Yeah, it's one of the more useful skills in my
campaign, up there with JoAT. Here's my definition:

	Scrounging	Int, Soc

  The character is skilled in finding items such as spare parts, tools,
weapons, etc. Scrounging involves more than just randomly searching, and
does not necessarily mean stealing items or doing anything illegal. The
character may be able to call in favors or be able to assemble a working
item from discarded junk. An individual with this skill is familiar with
the kinds of places to search for a particular item and the people likely
to have it. In the case of a previously contacted inhabited world, the
individual will have knowledge of the proper inhabitants to contact
regarding the availability of items, local laws governing their sale and
possession, and be aware of specific areas on the planet where goods are
most likely to be found.

Scrounging is in the Charisma skill cluster.

- --
Richard Hough
rdhough@orca.bc.ca

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

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 22:12:42 -0800
From: Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca>
Subject: Re: Anagathics

Interesting post, Michael.  I agree the treatment of anagathics is very
vague in Traveller. Since the time of the pharaohs humanity has searched
for the aqua vitae and the fountain of youth. And when is becomes available
it seems to have had no significant social consequences. Considering the
extremes people have gone to in history to gain eternal youth, even if
anagathics were totally illegal, cost millions of dollars per dose, and had
a 1% chance of working, a significant proportion of the population would
still do anything to get them.

I think the existing aging rules in T4 are fine, but there should be more
information on the effects on anagathics on aging rolls. I like the idea of
different forms of anagathics at different tech levels. While few player
characters ever die of old age, the existence of centuries-old characters
should have a significant effect on the society and game system. The
character generation rules should also take anagathincs into effect.
Perhaps a Formidable task against Soc each aging crisis during character
generation will allow the character to make the roll under the effect of
the local tech level's anagathic.

I plan on making anagathics just give one a DM on aging rolls in M:0. The
"stop aging" anagathic is a higher TL.


- --
Richard Hough
rdhough@orca.bc.ca

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 16:31:45 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: That DAMNED Half Die!

Marc wrote:

><< May Virus  infect your computer Marc! >>
>
>Actually, if you talk to some of the people who I sent the Task chapter to,
>you'll find that it did... a macro virus I  think.

Yup!

Thinking to print it as it looks on Friday, I started to upload it in the
one copy of WFW97 at work and Doc Solomons went mad. So I didn't. But
MacLink 8 converted it happily as a Word 6 file into Clarisworks on my
Powerbook, so I bypassed that problem!

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"Omnia Mutantur Nihil Interit"  -  Sandman 'The Wake'
"Everything Changes, but nothing is truly lost" 

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 17:59:40 +0000 ()
From: kraehe@bakunin.hb.north.de (Michael Koehne)
Subject: Re: Task Resolution: Let's organize the discussion

Moin Marc,

> I would love to have this discussion (based on the Task Chapter draft). I'll
> email that chapter to anyone who wants it. 

	BTW in RCES someone told that there is an MS-Program called
	Internet Assitant, which would make it posible to save MS-Word
	as HTML, so it would make it possible for people like me
	( MS free and proud of it ) to participate in the discussion.
- -- 
	kraehe@bakunin.north.de		human.is-bremen.de/~kraehe/traveller
		  " ceterum censeo MSDOS esse delendam "

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 17:52:43 +0000 ()
From: kraehe@bakunin.hb.north.de (Michael Koehne)
Subject: Re: T4.1 Task System Debate Redux

Moin Glenn Grant,

	I came up with a new (and improved task system :-) :

	Basics : Stats are 2d6 (1-12) while skills are (0-6)

	Taskresoltion : Skill >= (n-skill)d6

	Easy      : 3d6
	Average   : 4d6
	Difficult : 5d6
	Formidable: 6d6
	Imposible : 7d6

	e.g. a character with skill 3 wants to attempt a difficult
	task and has to roll 2d6, if he has a skill of 5 he has
	an automatic success.

By Michael
- -- 
	kraehe@bakunin.north.de		human.is-bremen.de/~kraehe/traveller
		  " ceterum censeo MSDOS esse delendam "

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 16:49:11 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: T4.1 Format/Presentation Idea 

Daniel Ray Lane wrote:

>Bruce Johnson wrote:
>
>> There was consdiderable discussion of this format when T4 was first being
>> discussed, the consensus ended up being (after some input from people
>> ewho've actually _produced_ such things) that it was expensive, and people
>> who are in the RPG market nowadays seem to want glossy covered expensive
>> books rather than a three ring binder, the usual triumph of style over
>> utility...(how else to account for such monstrosities as the Lincoln 4x4)
>>
>
>Yes, but many of the books on the market include nice three-ring
>punched holes.  Why not make a binder available (a nice D ring
>binder at that) with a really good cover insert and back insert.
>Maybe just the plain old Red/Black Classic Traveller "Traveller"
>and "Starship Beowulf" blurb.

In the UK we have two or four hole binders... so I would not be that
impressed with three hole ones. IIRC most of Europe uses two hole as well...

But it's a US game ;-&

One thing that the rules do need is a subtly different cover - the T4 rules
have a 'broken' reputation - reprinting them without something on the front
cover like 'revised and enhanced' may not help to overcome this problem.

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"Omnia Mutantur Nihil Interit"  -  Sandman 'The Wake'
"Everything Changes, but nothing is truly lost" 

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 11:19:59 -0600 (MDT)
From: Marcus Teter <marcus@geminga.physics.montana.edu>
Subject: 2047; 1.1 part 1

All right,
	Here is the corrections to the corporate states from version 1.0
based on the GOOD, BAD, MEAN-SPIRITED suggestion.

- --------------------------
Corporate States with Regional Influence in North America:
GOOD: GDW*, L&M/Rockwell*, CT*

BAD: AreoCorp, GiM, UPPS ent., TNE*

MEAN-SPIRITED: TML*, Yoyodyne, John's Inc.  

*Indicates Space Based interests.
- --------------------------

How is that?

Marcus

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 97 10:32:30 -0500
From: mteter <marcus@geminga.physics.montana.edu>
Subject: 2047; 1.1 part 2

- -- [ From: mteter * EMC.Ver #2.5.02 ] --

Here is the next installment for the 2047 global situation.

- ---------------------
2047
Part 2, South America:

	Nations: 15

	Major Powers: Brazil, Venezuala   

	Other Powers: Chile, Columbia, Argentina Norte

	Military Strength (relative): Venezuala, Brazil, Argentina Norte.

	Economic Strength (relative): Brazil, Chile, Venezuala

	Major Space Powers: NONE. 

	Minor Space Powers: Brazil, Venezuala

	Potential Space Powers: Argentina, Chile

	Economic Alliances: SAFTA(Chile, Bolivia, Argentina 	
	Norte, Paraguay, Brazil); Caracas Pact( Venezuala, Guyana, Suriname,
Eastern Guyana).  China/Ecuador. 
	Military Alliances: Caracas Pact( countering CC, CAA and SAFTA). SAFTA.

	Space Cooperation Efforts: SAFTA, Brazil/EU cooperation.

	Major Regional Multinational Corporate States: 
		GOOD: MT*, Uradyne.
		BAD: Ellocorp, TUVW*
		MEANSPIRITED: SppG	
- -------------------
I split Argentina North and South, wanting additional Nations.  Possible
reason for split: SAFTA.


Corrections? Additions? Coments?

Marcus A. Teter

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 13:11:04 -0400
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: Rob's CSC: a TL-9 Assault hovercraft

	Sort've a cross between a hovertank and a big APC...


                     Maaliikaan Assault hovercraft (TL9)

                          Designed by R.D.Elliott

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

Summary:
     12.50 displacement ton box streamlined; 89.4 tonnes; MCr 4.14
Chassis:
     175 kL box streamlined (8.7 m long x 4.5 m wide x 4.5 m high);
     Structure: 5.45 tonnes of light alloy, body 0.09 cm thick
     Armour: 11 front (3.0 cm, moderate slope), 8 sides (2.0 cm), 8 rear
     (1.5 cm), 8 top (1.5 cm), 8 bottom (1.5 cm); Stealth Structure: -3DM
     against TL9- military and TL10- civilian sensors
Performance:
     Primary: 8.02 MW TL8 Turbine, MHD power plant; Fuel: 12.8 kL of
     high-grade hcarb (12.8 tonnes), 16 hours supply Secondary: 2x 160 kW
     TL9 Storage Bank power plants
     Propulsion System: 8.00 MW hoverskirt with ; Maximum Speed: 193 km/h;
     Range: 3091 km; Agility: +3DM
Crew & Passengers:
     Crew roster: driver, 5 gunners, Navigator, Engineer; 8 crew stations;
     40 roomy passenger seats
Armament:
             Weapon          Damage     Range   Shots Reloads     Notes
      Autocannon, RF Lt-8 9           Long            0      +4DM, remote
      Cannon, Heavy-8     19 (17 exp) Very Long       0      +4DM, 1 gunner
      Autocannon, Light-8 9           Long                   +4DM, coaxial
      Machinegun, Medium-85           Long            0      1 gunner
      Machinegun, Medium-85           Long            0      1 gunner
      Machinegun, Medium-85           Long            0      1 gunner
      Machinegun, Medium-85           Long            0      1 gunner
      Missile, Light-8    22 (14 exp) Medium                 +4DM, remote
Communications:
     Subcontinental Radio (10.00 kW, TL9, MilSpec, DirAnt, DirFnd)
     Subregional Radio (100 W, TL9, SmVcl, MilSpec, DirAnt, DirFnd)
     Subcontinental Maser (10.00 kW, TL9, SmVcl, MilSpec)
     Regional Laser (1.00 kW, TL9, SmVcl, MilSpec)
     Available ()
     Available ()
     Available ()
     Available ()
     Available ()
     Available ()
Sensors:
     Active Regional Radar (2.00 kW, MilSpec, MultArray) Resolution: 5.0 mm
     per km of range
     Active Subregional Sonar (100 W) Resolution: 2.0 cm per km of range
     Active Subregional Jammer (200 W, MilSpec, MultArray) Resolution: 5.0
     mm per km of range
     Available (0 W) Resolution: 0.000 mm per km of range
     Available (0 W) Resolution: 0.000 mm per km of range
     Available (0 W) Resolution: 0.000 mm per km of range
     Available (0 W) Resolution: 0.000 mm per km of range
     Available (0 W) Resolution: 0.000 mm per km of range
     Available (0 W) Resolution: 0.000 mm per km of range
     Available (0 W) Resolution: 0.000 mm per km of range
Other:
     10.3 kL of cargo space

Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 10:08:36 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: New Proposal for the RoM TL Debate

At 07:45 PM 8/22/97 -0400, Dan Lane wrote:

>How about framing this debate in the setting of Milieu 0 or Milieu
>1100?  
>
>Both Leroy's camp (the "Solomanists") and the "Imperialists" make 
>excellent points that support their theses.  I can imagine that this 
>debate really DID rage among academicians, industrialists and scouts
>of the early Imperium.  Perhaps it persisted in Imperial circles well 
>into the 1100.  A precendent is the whole modern "lost civilizations" 
>discussion (i.e. Atlantis, Antarctica, etc...)

The problem is that the "lost world" people use myth and mysticism to
support their points, and fail to come up with proof.  The same applies to
the RoM debate.  We have it written down in several places that the RoM
achieved TL12, and it is accepted as "TML canon" that at the end, they
might have reached TL13 in some spots, with medical technolgy in the
experimental TL14 range.

The Solomanist position has claimed everything from the RoM being TL16 to
them having the same genetic technology as the Ancients! (TL25+).  There
hasn't been a single piece of evidence forwarded that explicitly supports
this position.  Even the terraforming arguement was shown, upon review, to
be useless.

Leroy, and any of the alleged "silent majority" who accept his views, are
welcome to run their games as a d/u/n/g/e/o/n/ c/r/a/w/l/ search for
m/a/g/i/c/a/l/ high tech relics.  TNE used this approach, and it was one of
the largest failings of the setting IMHO.

For the purposes of general discussion of on the Traveller Mailing List,
and for those of us who attempt to write for publication, we should stick
with the accepted, or canonical, history.  The RoM had a common TL of
high-end 12, any assumption otherwise will have to show proof in the
established body of Traveller work.

Now, if a T4 product is released that states that the RoM was TL14, or 17,
or 35 and run by Elvis' clone; then that will overrule what has come
before.  In a similar vein, if Marc or Loren were to speak out and say "we
intended it to be this way", I believe that would settle much of the
arguement.

>It makes for both a mystery and interesting discussion, tending to add
>an extra dimension to a universe.  Things like "Anomalies" would have 
>added tremendous fuel to the fire (and uncertainty to individuals'
>basic assumptions.

To be honest, "Anomalies" occupies the posistion of "best of the worst" for
T4.  I really haven't found allt hat much to use in that particular book.
Traveller has survived publications that violated canon before.  Remember
the Leviathan and it's 1/2ton jump torpedos?  The King Richard from FASA?
Hell, most any ship design from FASA.  I place the TL14 vacc suits in
"Anomalies" in that category: a mistake.  Make them TL13 and I can buy the
premise, since it would make sense that the Navy-dominated RoM would
develop cutting edge space equipment before the Long Night.

>Here's my suggestion (actually an enthusiastic request.  Both groups
>agree on the milieu that the debate occured most vigorously in.
>Create a "academic persona," a notable authority on the RoM or its
>relics.  Then have at it, in character, on the list. 

When the ISBA started doing that, there was a great deal of resitance to
on-line roleplay occuring here.  That's why we moved over to our own list.
While interesting, I don't think it would work since we don't have enough
*real* information to debate.   

This would come up the day after I take the RCCC comment out of my .sig


- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer to the Earth."                  |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1736
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Saturday, August 23 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1737



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: E21 Idea (was 2047; 1.0 part 1)
Encouraging Rob....
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1727
Femicide - already happened
Re: Task Resolution: Let's organize the discussion
Re: Zero-G Nappy Time (longish)
3d Blowthrough Rule
TTG Java classes updated to 1.1.3
T4 rules discussions
Re: What I'd like to see--Task Resolution
Re: RoM/Terra TL
Re: Starship gravity control
Re: Early Charges?
re: Task Resolution
Re: Encouraging Rob....
Re: Early Charges?
Re: Task Resolution
Re: alternate tech discussion
Re: E21 Idea (was 2047; 1.0 part 1)
Re: New Proposal for the RoM TL Debate
Lagrange points (was SF questions ...)
Re: Doctors (was Re: Marc's Comments on Skill Levels) 
Re: Task Resolution
Re: T4.1 Task System Debate Redux

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 97 11:13:05 -0500
From: mteter <marcus@geminga.physics.montana.edu>
Subject: Re: E21 Idea (was 2047; 1.0 part 1)

- -- [ From: mteter * EMC.Ver #2.5.02 ] --

shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) wrote:

>> but it could easily be Canadian or Mexican Border states.  Also, >the
>> Bahamas or the Virgin Islands are not out of the question.

>Don't forget that Texas still has the option (one of the conditions >made
when it joined the US) of splitting into *four* seperate states. >Every once
in a while this gets brought up as a way for them to get >more Senators... :
- -)

Wow.  I had forgotten about that.  It seems like the ultimate in political
leverage.  I wonder why it hasn't been used yet.

TANSTAAFL, YCHTBE,
Marcus

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 13:19:39 -0400
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: Encouraging Rob....

Rob Prior wrote:

>
>>	Now what the Mac-using Trav community really needs, though, is for
>>Rob to write up a similar application, but for FF&S2 (I'm drooling at the
>>thought) :).
>
>
>I'm working on it.  Early completion of this project would be greatly
>enhanced by large and regular contributions of money.


	Well, actually, I was thinking about sending you a six-pack of
Trois-Pistoles, the latest from Quebec Microbrewery Unibroue.  Visualize
Guiness brewed by Famille Spofulam and you'll get the concept quite nicely
:).

	Would an alcoholic coma and colossal hangover slow down the coding
process <innocent grin>?


Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 13:57:19 -0400
From: "Chris Cox" <chriscox@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1727

Michael,
You wrote:

> as a competing company we are of course intested of what
> you have to offer to the Kaneshi Empire. BTW you should
> chance your laser T4 stats to 3-2-0-0, if the laser
> is realy 10:42,20:21. I would be further interested in
> the exact laser calculation. FYI here are mine (FFS1) :

The stats for the laser bays, 1/2-0-0-0, are what are listed in QSDS1.5 and
that is what I used for designing my THUDDD entry.  After the entry was
finished, I then went back and redesign the ship using some speadsheets found
on the Vyborg Campaign wep page.  I desigend a laser that used the same power
and was the same volume or less than that listed in QSDS and ended up with
the following design:
- ----------------------------------------------------
Vol(m3)  Mass(ton)  Power(MW)  Area(m2)  Price(MCr)
351      511        111.111    44        38.3

ROF  Short       Medium     Long       Extreme
100  10:1/13-42  20:1/7-21  40:1/3-11  80:1/2-5

Battel Riders:  L(-2)10:2-1-0-0
T4:             1/3-2-0-0

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

I'm at a loss as to why, despite using the same amount of power, my design is
smaller, cheaper and more effective (I also double check the design using a
speadsheet by Dave Golden).  Someday I may change the T4 stats for the Kukri
class SDB on my web page but I think its proable too late for my THUDDD
entry.

Chris Cox
(chriscox@ix.netcom.com)
The Draconis Cluster Web pages
(http://users.aol.com/yanbeck/trav.htm)

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 19:24:49 +0100
From: Jo_Grant/DUB/Lotus@lotus.com
Subject: Femicide - already happened

Yo Folks,
     Just catching up on old digests. Many people said how the imbalance in
genders by selective killing of female children in India and/or China will
have to even out pretty soon. Actually, there is another historical example
that was much worse.
     Based on evidence in Scandinavian graveyards they, too, practiced
selective female infanticide and ended up with a gender ratio of 7 or 8 to
1! Far more pronounced than we are currently seeing. The result? Well,
large bands of angry young men roaming from as far as Nova Scotia to
Byzantium.
     One can put a whole new twist on TNE's "Star Vikings" :-)...
          Jo

PS: I can cite the references for this if anyone want to read further on
it.

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 11:36:58 -0700 (PDT)
From: "John R. Snead" <jsnead@netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution: Let's organize the discussion

CardSharks@aol.com wrote:

>In a message dated 97-08-23 01:47:09 EDT, you write:
<< 
 >I'm going to assume (I know the joke ;-) that you have firmly decided on
 >mechanic 2, and T4.1 will use a variable number of dice...Please 
 >correct me if I'm wrong...and suggest that the next topic to be 
 >discussed should be what you have termed Competency Levels.  Not how 
 >many dice!  Not half dice!  Not the range of skills or characteristics!
  >>

>I would love to have this discussion (based on the Task Chapter draft). I'll
>email that chapter to anyone who wants it. 

I don't use MS Word, & I'd be amazingly grateful if someone would email 
me an RTF version of the chapter.

Many Thanks-


- -John Snead jsnead@netcom.com

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 97 13:09:31 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: Zero-G Nappy Time (longish)

On 08/22/97 at 03:07 PM,  shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) said:

>I'd like to see a "thrustless drive". :-) 

Jump drive. Stutterwarp. ;-p

However, I *agree* with you, I'd like to see one too!  Heck, I'd like to
see a reactionless one! ;->


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

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 97 13:14:28 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: 3d Blowthrough Rule

On 08/19/97 at 08:48 AM,  "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
said:

>> > I think the combat system is basically good, tweak and refine at will, 
>> > but, as mentioned before, kill the 3D max damage rule.
 
>> No, don't kill it, include a few more exceptions to the rule
>> (explosive ammo, energy weapons, etc).  Either that or eliminate it as
>> a general rule and have it apply to only those methods of attack for
>> which it makes more sense (300 m/s and greater projectile weapons).

>I agree with James here.  Originally, I didn't like the rule--but  that
>was because I did not understand it.

I understand the reasoning behind the blowthrough rule too, but why 3d? 
Why not 4d?  

Why not a different number of dice based on the bulk of the target?
Something like: for human sized targets, 4d; for smaller targets 2d; for
larger targets 5d; for elephants and whales 6d; etc.

Eris

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

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 20:11:36 +0100
From: Jo_Grant/DUB/Lotus@lotus.com
Subject: TTG Java classes updated to 1.1.3

Yo Folks,
     I've updated the ttg and ttg.io classes to Java 1.1.3. You can find
them on ftp://ftp.maths.tcd.ie/pub/jaymin/ttg/ttgj113.zip.
     If anyone wants the ttg.tcs, ttg.cgi, and ttg.ui, let me know.
          Jo

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 97 13:44:33 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: T4 rules discussions

On 08/23/97 at 01:39 PM,  Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior) said:

>Sounds OK to me.  In fact, I like it better than the 'official' levels,
>but from what I hear of the new task system (and skill levels) Marc likes
>something different.

>Oh well, looks like I'm going to be following Marc's advice and modifying
>rules (like the task system) to better suit my players.

That's the thing Rob, if Marc has made up his mind firmly about specific
portions of the rules, I wish he would tell us what he's decided and say,
"No more discussion on this topic is requested at this time."  As it stands
now, I'm not sure what he's decided and what he's still open to
modification on. 

Yes, it looks very likely that I'll be modifing the rules (heck, rewriting
them ;-) extensively too.  Might as well get started.

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

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 97 13:17:25 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: What I'd like to see--Task Resolution

On 08/19/97 at 08:48 AM,  "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
said:

>Nope.  I just wanted T4 skills to compatible with CT/MT skills.  Even  in
>CT/MT, we occassionally saw a level 8 skill.  As long as it is  just
>occassionally, I'm happy seeing level 8 skills in T4.  What I  don't want
>is a character with two level 12 skills, four level 10  skills, several
>level 8's, etc.

Ken, that depends on the scale of the target numbers.  There's no reason
the skill component of the target number shouldn't be 8, 10, 12, if the
scale is arrainged appropriately.

>I'm very much happy with what Marc and others have posted as to how  T4.1
>characters will turn out.  I think that they are very compatible  with
>CT/MT now that I've seen that.

So, tell the truth Ken, are you still going to use KB2? ;->

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

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 97 20:49 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: RoM/Terra TL

In-Reply-To: <9708200131.AA16239@ouray.cudenver.edu>

Leroy,

> Sorry, but it is clear to me, that Terra was TL15+ at the outset of the
> Solomani Rim War, c. 998.

I don't have a source, but I thought the Imperium reached TL15 *during 
the war* (c.1000).
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 97 20:49 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: Starship gravity control

In-Reply-To: <199708202049.NAA16935@eskimo.com>

Tony,

> Now, I always took this to mean that every cabin had a little dial by
> the door marked "Gravity" along with the ones marked "Temperature",
> "Air Pressure", and so on, and that the passengers could set their
> own inside their caibn..  I'm perfectly comfortable with the
> idea that the crew can override the local gravity control from the bridge.

That's the way I've always run it.
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 97 20:49 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: Early Charges?

In-Reply-To: <970821005846_1850612862@emout20.mail.aol.com>

> But I'm really tired of the Imperium bashing that the net and the TML seems
> to love to do.

We don't *enjoy* IG-bashing. We'd all be much happier praising them rather 
than burying them, but when one product (CotI) is a year late, most are full 
of errors, and some are so bad it's embarrassing (like Starships), what else 
can we do? We want IG to succeed, but we also want products that are properly 
proof-read and playtested, and come out on time (in that order).
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 97 20:49 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: re: Task Resolution

In-Reply-To: <19970820195306578.AAA371@[192.168.2.7]>

> 1. It uses the half die.
> I may not know art but I know what I do not like; And it is D3's. It also
> does not have the same effect on the bell curve as would a normal die 6
>  
> 2. Tasks are too easy.
> Players are notoriously good at rolling high stats. This skews the whole
> system. And makes the guy who lucked out able to trash his more skill based
> compatriots, forever. 
>  
> 3. Tasks use full strength Char and Full Strength Skill in the task
> statement (corollary: skills are unqually represented compared to
> characteristics).
> I want stats to mean something (ie same skill but smarter, smarter wins) but
> I would prefer that experience beats raw talent.

My vote would be to lose the D3 and use (stat/2)+skill. This would reduce the 
dominance of stats over skills, and in the process make tasks harder.
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 12:58:00 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Encouraging Rob....

At 01:19 PM 8/23/97 -0400, Rod wrote:

>Rob Prior wrote:
>>
>>>	Now what the Mac-using Trav community really needs, though, is for
>>>Rob to write up a similar application, but for FF&S2 (I'm drooling at the
>>>thought) :).
>>
>>I'm working on it.  Early completion of this project would be greatly
>>enhanced by large and regular contributions of money.
>
>	Well, actually, I was thinking about sending you a six-pack of
>Trois-Pistoles, the latest from Quebec Microbrewery Unibroue.  Visualize
>Guiness brewed by Famille Spofulam and you'll get the concept quite nicely
>:).

For this, I would learn to code for a Mac....

>	Would an alcoholic coma and colossal hangover slow down the coding
>process <innocent grin>?

It's funny, but i've gotten more writing done in the last few days on
massive doses of Prednisone than I've accomplished in months.  Of course,
85% of it makes the works of William S. Burroughs look like "Dick and Jane
go to Sylea", but some of it is worthwhile.

I was chatting with a net friend who runs a microbrewery in Oregon.. he's
offered to do a run of Scout Brew if I design and print up the labels.  now
we have to have a Traveller Con!

Let's drink to excess!

To EXCESS!!!!  *clink*

- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 15:05:34 -0500
From: Alex Ingram <ingram@airmail.net>
Subject: Re: Early Charges?

Harold Hale wrote:
> 
> Thomas Walter Trelenberg writes:
> 
> >I hope Traveller Chronicle, of which I believe you now said you were a
> >part, has also adopted this policy.  It was a lack of this attitude
> >which, after not receiving two issues and being left with no recourse
> >that I dropped my subscription.  I hope that now that you are a part of
> >this enterprise, you will hold to these ideals, because dependable
> >support of Traveller from companies (outside IG) is very important to
> >its survival.  Outside companies often provide very interesting insite
> >into the platforms they support which seem to be "missed" by the
> >"parent" company.  Look at DGP! :-}
> 
>    I agree completely.  The publication of material by outside companies
> benefits the game (greater diversity), the game publisher (free
> advertising anyone?), and the hobby in general (if for no other reason
> than it takes up shelf space that a FLGS might be tempted to use for
> some low-class CCG).  While it is possible to keep everything internal
> (IIRC Games' Workshop works this way), small to medium-sized operations
> get a tremdous benefit from licensing other vendors to produce product.
> 
>    TTC #13 is in the process of being completed (an artist for a crucial
> project busted up her drawing arm if you can believe that).  Good news
> on the shipping date should follow soon.  In future issues, I expect to
> publish both Traveller and Marc Miller's Traveller material (we are in
> need of good quality artwork and articles for both).
> 
>    As for the missing issues, send me your particulars and I'll take the
> matter up with Kevin Knight, who still handles circulation matters.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Harold


What is the Traveller Chronicle, how long has it been around, and where
I can get it?

Alex Ingram
ingram@airmail.net

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 13:41:34 -0700
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

Wouldn't it be better to define skill levels based on the final
target number?  A pilot is going to be regarded as competant
based on his ability to perform, not on how many hours he
has had some teacher jabber at him.  A Dex 3 character is
going to have to do a lot more to pass the pilots test than
a Dex 11 character.

____________________________
Summers@Alum.MIT.edu

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 16:16:42 -0500 (CDT)
From: Joseph "Chepe" Lockett <jlockett@io.com>
Subject: Re: alternate tech discussion

Quoth Richard Hough:
> What about power, control, and logic devices using photonic (optical
> devices controlling pulses of light), gravitic (employing solid-state
> matricies of gravitic potentials), or nucleonic (microscopic machines using
> tghe strong nuclear force) technology? These technologies could have
> significantly greater bandwidth, power, and reliability than electronic
> technology. I think AT&T has experimented with photonic devices.

Why do so many Traveller afficionadoes believe in "gravitics" as some
mysterious science with potential beyond "mere" artificial gravity and
thruster plates?  Gravity is the weakest of the fundamental forces, thus
I doubt it would be as effective a basis for technology as E&M (either
electronic, photonic, or photic (to use another poster's term)) or,
certainly, nucleonic forces.

This is not a flame -- merely a polite disagreement.

- ----------------------------*------------------------*------------------------
 Joseph L. "Chepe" Lockett  |"Nullum magnum ingenium | GURPS fan, Amiga user,
http://www.io.com/~jlockett | sine mixtura dementiae | Shakespearean scholar,
  Email: jlockett@io.com    | fuit." -- Seneca       | actor and director.

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 16:28:31 -0500 (CDT)
From: Joseph "Chepe" Lockett <jlockett@io.com>
Subject: Re: E21 Idea (was 2047; 1.0 part 1)

Quoth mteter:
> > Don't forget that Texas still has the option (one of the conditions
> > made when it joined the US) of splitting into *four* seperate states.
> > Every once in a while this gets brought up as a way for them to get
> > more Senators... :-)
> 
> Wow.  I had forgotten about that.  It seems like the ultimate in political
> leverage.  I wonder why it hasn't been used yet.

Who would get the Alamo?  :-)

Actually, I wonder if that rule still applies.  After all, Texas had to be
re-admitted to the Union after the Civil War.  'Twould be an interesting
argument if we tried it.  (I live in Houston.)

- ----------------------------*------------------------*------------------------
 Joseph L. "Chepe" Lockett  |"Nullum magnum ingenium | GURPS fan, Amiga user,
http://www.io.com/~jlockett | sine mixtura dementiae | Shakespearean scholar,
  Email: jlockett@io.com    | fuit." -- Seneca       | actor and director.

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 17:12:06 -0500 (CDT)
From: Joseph "Chepe" Lockett <jlockett@io.com>
Subject: Re: New Proposal for the RoM TL Debate

Quoth Douglas E. Berry:
> I place the TL14 vacc suits in "Anomalies" in that category: a mistake.
> Make them TL13 and I can buy the premise, since it would make sense that
> the Navy-dominated RoM would develop cutting edge space equipment before
> the Long Night.

Did we ever decide if it's reasonable for TL13/14 equipment to last for
1700 years in storage, and still remain usable?  That, as much as the
canon discrepancy, is what bugs me about the adventure.

- ----------------------------*------------------------*------------------------
 Joseph L. "Chepe" Lockett  |"Nullum magnum ingenium | GURPS fan, Amiga user,
http://www.io.com/~jlockett | sine mixtura dementiae | Shakespearean scholar,
  Email: jlockett@io.com    | fuit." -- Seneca       | actor and director.

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 14:38:35 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Lagrange points (was SF questions ...)

Here's some info on the subject...
[re-mailed to you from rec.arts.sf.science]
[the original seemed to come from max@alcyone.com]

You heard right; it's just that the Lagrange point "names" L1 through L5
are for the _points_, not for the points in the Earth-Sun-Moon system.

Quick diagram (works much better than words); P is the primary, S is the
secondary, 1-5 are Lagrange points 1 through 4:


                                        4




         3                      P              1 S 2




                                        5


L4 is the leading point, L5 is the leading point (taking into account
the motion of the secondary around the primary*).  L1-3 are never
stable.  L4 and L5 can be stable if the primary is more than about 25**
times the mass of the secondary; otherwise, they too are unstable.

.. 

* Of course they orbit each other, but you know what I mean.

** Actually, more like 24.9599.


- -- 
          Erik Max Francis, &tSftDotIotE / mailto:max@alcyone.com
                        Alcyone Systems / http://www.alcyone.com/max/
   San Jose, California, United States / icbm://37.20.07n/121.53.38w
                                      \
                  "War is like love; / it always finds a way."
                                    / Bertolt Brecht
- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 14:03:16 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Re: Doctors (was Re: Marc's Comments on Skill Levels) 

John R. Snead <jsnead@netcom.com> wrote

> Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com> wrote:
> 
> >CardSharks@aol.com wrote:
> 
> >> Empirical evidence from playtesting of T41 indicates that most 
> >> character have skill levels between 2 and 4 for the skills that they 
> >> figure are important.
> >> 
> >> It is a mistake to say specifically that CT skills ranged from 1 to 6 
> >> and T4 (T41) skills range from 1 to 15. Skills in CT could range from 1 
> >> to 15 as well.
> 
> >This is a well informed view of things that I completely agree with.  If
> >T4.1 is providing skills to characters in a similar fashion as CT
> >advanced chargen (mercenary, etc), then I am completely happy.
> >
> >Given this, skill definitions should remain the same, which is what I
> >wanted in the first place.  Skill-1 is a novice;  Skill-3 is a
> >professional;  Skill-5 is an expert.
> >That's EXACTLY what I wanted!
> 
> I agree with this fully.  
> 
> Marc, you also mentioned how in MT and CT advanced char gen
> character's received 1-1.25 skills/term and that in T4.1 they also
> receive 1.25 skills/term.
> 
> If this is the case why change the skill level meanings?  In CT/MT 
> Medical 3 = Doctor, naval Architect 3 = Professional.  These 
> distinctions were all written down in the rules.  If character's 
> receive approximately the same number of skills in 
> approximately the same ranges then why change the meanings
> of the skill levels?

Even if skill level 3 is treated as Professional in most fields Doctors
should still be skill level 6 (six).  Doctors go through many years of
schooling, college (in which they may or may not take a pre-med course),
graduate (Medical) school, and after grad (medical) school they _still_
have to go through an apprenticeship program (an internship, etc) before
they are considered fully professional.  This many years of training -
most of which is _quite_ harsh - should produce high levels of skill in
a Doctor. It is certainally true that if we were to broaden out the
Medical skill into several subfields not all of the training med
students and interns receive would all be towards the generic Medical
skill but I still think skill level 6 in needed for a Doctor.  I would
not want someone as _my_ Doctor IRL if they did not have skill level six
or more.

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 17:35:20 +0000
From: Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

CardSharks@aol.com wrote:
> 
> In a message dated 97-08-23 01:34:53 EDT, you write:
> 
> <<
>  Given this information, based on Marc's empiracle (how do you spell that
>  word anyway?) evidence, we don't need new skill definitions.
> 
> >>
> 
> If definitions means saying Skill-1 is this, Skill-2 is that, then that's
> true.

That's exactly what I was saying.  I was speaking of skill levels, not
actual skill definitions (Electronics, Medical, Pistol, etc.)

> On th eother hand, when a whole text of Electronics is

You are completely correct here, and I agree with you fully.  Make those
actual skill definitions specific and loaded with examples!

> and half the text is taken up saying maybe you could use Edu or Int to help
> you, I think we need new skill texts... including example tasks, discussion
> of several areas where Electronics can be applied like,
> 
>         Diagnosis of Faults.
>         Repair and Maintenance.
>         Equipment Design (Modular).
>         Equipment Design (Custom).


Absolutely.  Marc, you're the man!

Kenneth.

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 17:42:23 +0000
From: Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: T4.1 Task System Debate Redux

Michael Koehne wrote:
> 
> Moin Glenn Grant,
> 
>         I came up with a new (and improved task system :-) :
> 
>         Basics : Stats are 2d6 (1-12) while skills are (0-6)
> 
>         Taskresoltion : Skill >= (n-skill)d6
> 
>         Easy      : 3d6
>         Average   : 4d6
>         Difficult : 5d6
>         Formidable: 6d6
>         Imposible : 7d6
> 
>         e.g. a character with skill 3 wants to attempt a difficult
>         task and has to roll 2d6, if he has a skill of 5 he has
>         an automatic success.

Interesting idea, but how are you coming up with target numbers?

In your example, the level 3 character has to roll 2D6 for a Difficult
task.  What is his target number?   Lower than what on 2D6?

Kenneth.

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1737
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Saturday, August 23 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1738



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: 3d Blowthrough Rule
Re: What I'd like to see--Task Resolution
Re: Task Resolution
Re: Rob's CSC
Re: Task Resolution
Re: Task Resolution: Let's organize the discussion 1
Re: RoM/Terra TL
Re: RoM/Terra TL
Re: combat system in T4.1
Re: combat system in T4.1
<CT,MT> High Guard Design/Tech Analysis
Updated CSC
Re: alternate tech discussion
Binders and other Trivia

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 17:51:58 +0000
From: Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: 3d Blowthrough Rule

> I understand the reasoning behind the blowthrough rule too, but why 3d?
> Why not 4d?
> 
> Why not a different number of dice based on the bulk of the target?
> Something like: for human sized targets, 4d; for smaller targets 2d; for
> larger targets 5d; for elephants and whales 6d; etc.

Sounds good to me.  Whatever you want, Eris. I'm game.

Kenneth.

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 17:49:56 +0000
From: Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: What I'd like to see--Task Resolution

Eris Reddoch wrote:
> So, tell the truth Ken, are you still going to use KB2? ;->

I really don't want to, but it depends on if Marc fixes the problem of
characteristics having too much influence over skills with regard to
success at tasks.

KBv2.0 was designed to correct two things in T4--the half die and the
stat vs skill problems.

If Marc fixes the stat vs skill problem and still uses the half die,
I'll probably switch to his official system.

If Marc does not fix the stat vs skill problem, whether or not the half
die is included,then I'll keep KBv2.0.

In my eyes, it is a serious problem when a level-1 medic can out perform
a level-4 medic just because the novice has a high Edu.

I'd like to see that fixed.

Kenneth.

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 17:59:59 +0000
From: Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

David P. Summers wrote:
> 
> Wouldn't it be better to define skill levels based on the final
> target number?  A pilot is going to be regarded as competant
> based on his ability to perform, not on how many hours he
> has had some teacher jabber at him.  A Dex 3 character is
> going to have to do a lot more to pass the pilots test than
> a Dex 11 character.

Very interesting idea, David.  I like it.  How would you do it?

Kenneth.

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

Date: 23 Aug 1997 23:02:40 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: Rob's CSC

>	Something that should be noted is that the fact that the propulsion
>system is designed for adverse conditions, and is reflected in the
>spreadsheet view, but it doesn't appear in the descriptive notes view,
>which is what you're seeing here.

It should, assuming that you type in a description of what the adverse
condition modifications are.  Hm, I guess I need a default for a blank
description...


>The ammo export bug does not reflect
>the fact that it has 10 missiles overall and 4 bombs.

Oops.  Should display reloads.  Will fix it after I finish cleaning the
bathroom.

Oh yes, did I tell you about the shareware fee?  You see, I really hate
housework, so... :-)

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 17:58:57 +0000
From: Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

> My vote would be to lose the D3 and use (stat/2)+skill. This would reduce the
> dominance of stats over skills, and in the process make tasks harder.


The problem with using a method of dividing stats is that stats change
in combat.  When your character gets wounded, you have to recalculate
again.

That's why I went with multiplying the skill (instead of dividing the
stat) in KBv2.0.  Skills never change during combat.  You've already
made the calculation and written it in its own column right next to the
skill.

All you have to do is add that number to your stat (whatever it
currently is) and roll dice--you're rockin' and rollin' just as quickly
as you would be if you were just adding skill + stat.

It seems to me that dividing the stat becomes too cumbersome during
play--"Oh, my character just took five points of damage!  I've got only
3 points of Dex left!  Let'see...that's 2 points or only 1 point do I
add to my skill level when I shoot back?"

Kenneth.

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 19:11:01 -0400 (EDT)
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: Task Resolution: Let's organize the discussion 1

Date: 23 Aug 1997 23:08:10 GMT
Message-Id: <2903769086.120416942@nybe.north-york.on.ca>
Organization: North York Board of Education

>For example, it is clear that there have to be tasks with skill only (no
>characteristics). There have to be tasks with characteristics only (no
>skill). There have to be tasks with skill possible but optional. Then there
>are Uncertain, Hasty, etc etc.

True.

A point about the CT/T4 task comparisons everyone seems to be missing.

CT and T4 will have (apparently) the same skill levels. However, CT tasks
(once CT got a task system) only used stat/5, not the entire stat.  True, the
target numbers were different, but the amount contributed by the stat was
(usually) less than that contributed by the skill.

This is the change in balance that bothers me (and, I think, Eris and the
others).  It doesn't matter if skills have the same numerical value as they
did in CT/MT, because their effects will be different.

That stated, I have a suggestion.

Before we discuss specifics like numerical levels, lets decide the
chance-of-success (in %) for people at different competency levels (label,
eg. Novice, Professional) at different task difficulties (standard task
names).

Once this is settled (!), we can worry about exact numbers (ie. dice rolled,
attribute and skill levels, multipliers or lack thereof, and so on).  I
suspect a lot of these numbers will be fairly obvious if we can take this one
step at a time.

Actualy, I'll go further.  Marc, as this is your game, what do _you_ see as
being the chance of success for various task difficulties?

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 17:05:38 -0600
From: lguatney@carbon.cudenver.edu (Leroy William Lu Guatney)
Subject: Re: RoM/Terra TL

On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 11:58:35 -0700
bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh) writes:
>Subject: Re: RoM/Terran TL
>
>Leroy writes
>>I did the same analysis and it is a 3:1 advantage, which is
>>significant.
>
>Just out of curiosity - how did you do this analysis?


See post near this on the TML's output. (I still have to write it, but
it should follow this one.)


>>Just for averages, assume that the entire nine sectors of the Sphere
>>are twice as populous as the average Third Imperial sector (which the
>>sector data do not bear out).  That makes the Sphere about equal in
>>population, hence production, as the Third Imperium.
>
>>Then, the Imperium _still_ has a 3:1 advantage over the Solomani, and
>>I:E states that the Imperium was _prepared_ for the conflict having
>>reinforced the border.
>
>First, it's only a 3:1 advantage if you assume that *all* the imperial forces
>are TL-15, which they certainly aren't; the imperium had *just barely*
>started to transition to TL-15. 


And the Solomani were not uniformly TL14 or TL15 either.  The assumptions
can generally cancel, and if they don't, they go to the advantage of the
Imperium.  Try the opposite angle of view on this problem, if the Solomani
_only_ had TL14 outfitting, and _that_ was not a majority, then the outcome
of the war would not have been a _stalemate_--the Solomani _must_ have been
TL15 in their sphere, and fairly well established as such, or it would have
just been No Contest--the Solomani would have been pasted, and hung up to
dry--none of this armistice with no formal recognition nonsense, allowing
the Solomani to retreat and regroup at Home, in Aldebaran.


>I say again: if the Imperium had significant quantities of TL-15 troops, they
>would have appeared in Invasion: Earth. No matter what was going on elsewhere,
>invading Earth was the single most important land battle the Imperium was
>going to fight in the Rim War. If they had TL-15 troops, they would have
>included *some* of them there. Similarly, if Earth was TL-15, *some* of its
>home defence troops would have been TL-15, and been present. 


Sorry, I guess I thought you were talking about the Solomani, _not_ the
Imperial forces.  Yes, that is reasonable, but as I have pointed out,

  1) the games use of TL is somewhat blurred anyway, and

  2) with the MT boost to things, just add +1 to Solomani Tech from the
     I:E perspective


>Second - even if the Imperium had a 3:1 effective advantage, they couldn't 
>deploy *everything* to the Rim; they had to keep enough forces present 
>to deter the Zhodani, the Aslan, the Vargr, the K'Kree...and this was the
>period of the "crustal" Imperial strategy, where most forces were 
>forward-deployed. 


Just like the Solomani having to watch the Aslan, Hivers and possible
client state encroachments if they were to pull everything out.  True,
the Solomani were more desperate, but they barely made a dent in the
coreward frontier, and were repulsed rather easily.

Actually, given the assumptions I previously made, if the Solomani are only
TL14, I'd give the Imperium at least a 4:1 advantage in the Rim War.  The
Solomani are not as well organized militarily as the Third Imperium--no
depots, etc. etc. etc.


>Finally - the Imperium having a significant (perhaps 2:1) advantage is
>perfectly consistent with the results to the war; the Imperium was on the
>offensive - and you need an advantage to win if you're on the offensive; they
>captured large amounts of territory (but not all they wanted), which is
>basically consistent with the Imperium being slightly but not very much
>stronger
>than the Solomani.


Not really.  The library data of I:E makes it clear that both sides knew
was portends the future held, and were roughly prepared.  Remember, it was
120 years after the declaration of the Solomani Confederation before the
Rim War broke out.


>I notice you haven't addressed the absence of other TL-15 Solomani worlds in
>1110 - did they absent-mindedly leave all their technological information 
>on Sol while they were busy evacuating all their TL-15 troops to avoid
>confusing future archeologists?


As I said, a "revision" applied to MT took care of this.  Yes, that presents
a problem for trying to understand a consistent timeline, however consider
that from my reading of the differences between Supplement 10 and the
Alien Module 6: Solomani (both CT), it is clear that GDW was taking a step
back from some of the things that had been written in the earlier source.


>I admire your tenacity, Leroy...but try applying Occam's razor: in the
>complete absence of TL-15 counters in I:E, the best explanation is that
>neither side had significant TL-15 forces anywhere, not that they magically
>shuffled all of them off. If nearly the whole Solomani Sphere in 1110 is
>TL-14, the best explanation is that they were all TL-14 in 1000, not that 
>they mysteriously slipped back.


Thank You, but I can't even remember Occam's razor, let alone apply it. :)


>Even *you* have to admit that the Imperium is ahead of the Sphere
>technologically
>in 1100.l Why can't you admit that the same is true in 1000?


The first statement is true.  As the vast Imperium pulled away from the
Rim, politically and technologically, (remember that in 1100, they have
all those TL16 worlds in the TL15 Imperium, which is understandable, but
should not be forgotten.

One thing on that note.  I think the MT departure (late-CT as well) from
a clear consistent Tech Level makes these waters muddier as well.  I think
I do have a solution.  Though they did not always obey this consistently,
I think you should use the highest of all areas of tech in the UPP
of the given world.  For example, they did do this for Sabmiqys.  They
say that the world was TL8 when it came to space travel, but TL17 when it
comes to their robotics tech.  Similarly, Terra was TL14 at the end of
the FIW (their jump tech noticebly less, at TL9, or perhaps they were
actually higher, but just did not have a clear understanding of that
little invention they came up with out there in the Belt).

I am trying to show that just relying upon CT alone is not always enough
to have a consistent understanding of the Traveller universe.  The fact
that it was published through several editions of the game only makes this
task more complex, and perhaps only possible by old Traveller codgers like
J.P. and myself. <G> (I won't take the chance of offending other old
codgers, I know how they can be. <G>)


>Bruce
>

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 17:04:42 -0600
From: lguatney@carbon.cudenver.edu (Leroy William Lu Guatney)
Subject: Re: RoM/Terra TL

On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 00:09:43 -0400
hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale) writes:
>
>Leroy W.L. Guatney writes:
>
>>Now if you are telling me that a bunch of Terrans at TL14 can take on the
>>Third Imperium at one entire tech level disadvantage
>
>   This is incorrect.  We know that the Imperial Army and Marines were
>equipped with the Trepida grav tank and its APC sister vehicle at the
>start of the Rebellion (1116), and that these were *standard* AFVs
>(meaning that they are the most numerous type).  Both vehicles were TL
>14, *not* TL 15.  It would therefore be logical to conclude that the
>First Solomani Rim War (which occured over 100 years earlier) was fought
>between two opponents that had TL 14 ground forces (space forces being
>another matter).


Not really.  The Imperium has _always_ (M1100) had a diversified range of
Tech Level equipment/troops/ships that were deployed.


>>--well let's just say
>>that is like the Terrans in their 4900 ton ships taking on 74,900 ton Vilani
>>ships. (In fact, I would venture a guess that the Vilani would need only
>>one ship!)
>
>   Your assumption is that the Terrans were fighting the largest Vilani
>warships, which IIRC was not the case early on.   Just as the U.S.
>didn't throw its full weight into the Vietnam War, the Vilani held out
>its best forces.


Not an assumption.  Just best case scenarios for _both_ sides.


>>Sorry, but it is clear to me, that Terra was TL15+ at the outset of the
>>Solomani Rim War, c. 998.
>
>   Actually this is possible, since Terra was the capital of the
>Solomani Confederation (IIRC, Zhodane is one TL higher than the rest of
>the Consulate).  The loss of Terra would then leave the Confederation
>without a TL 15 world--a devastating blow, which would give further
>support to the reasoning of Imperial commanders that Terra must be
>captured.


Thank You.  Progress is always helpful. :)


>>Well, for the same reasons, if the Imperium _was_ TL15, wouldn't they be
>>using their TL15 troops.  We could throw out the TL tables of the Imperia
>>in the much heralded MT Ref's Companion, but that would at the same time,
>>eject the only direct quote for a TL12 RoM.
>
>   Once again, for whatever reason (probably the cost of replacing
>equipment), the Third Imperium was fielding TL 14 equipment for its
>ground forces in 1116, even though there were clearly many worlds that
>were TL 15.


See above, and...

Actually, as I said before, this discussion has helped me to see through
the prospects that MegaTraveller didn't do so much up-teching as it did
further clarification.  For example, after Chris's help in locating the
Vilani/No Meson factoid in the Contact: Sabmiqys (Challenge 28), I now
realize that this was pretty much a required "fact" of the Vilani, or the
Terrans would have been a Vilani province at the conclusion of the FIW.


>>>(Does anyone with access to Supplement 10 remember if there were any TL-15
>>>worlds on the Solomani side of the border even in 1107?)
>>
>>None whatsoever.  They were all TL14 max.  One world over the border in
>>Aldebaran sector, adjacent to the Near Bootes cluster was TL15.  That was
>>in GDW's newsletter "Imperial Lines" #2.
>
>   What was the name of that world?


Please note that I am several digests behind and this may have been answered
already.  I barely found it given that we just got done have three large rooms
of our house steam cleaned today.  I decided it was mandatory to post this
given the past experience with "post your sources, post yur sources, I said
post ure damned sources". :)  But what the hey, I did say where it was printed
didn't I.  And Hey, at least _I_ read this stuff. :)

Darsei/Aldebaran 1401 (A765845-F)

It was in the MT article on the Bootean Federation.  The Imperial Lines
newsletters where distributed with late MT (perhaps early TNE) products
from GDW.

I came across the notes awhile back while working on a reference map I
have created of the Pocket Empires of the Rim.


>>For the record, Inv: Earth gives _both_ sides TL14 troops counters.  The
>>Imperial forces are broken down as to Regulars, Colonials, etc., but no
>>such distinction is made for the Solomani counters.  (Exactly why I
>>stated that the claim that Earth was TL13 was, well, an exaggeration.)
>
>   This fits nicely with establish canon.  I'm not sure what the problem
>is here.  While it is possible that the Imperium and Solomani had some
>TL 15 commandos or other small elite formations, at the scale the game
>is conducted, they would not have been a factor in the fighting (or
>would have been lumped in with a lower tech formation).


Exactly, and you can still point to the fact that MT redid the whole
Solomani Sphere as a max. TL15, rather than the previous TL14.
Just add +1 to relevant CT sources that may have been written before
the "change."


>>As for RoM TL, the little bit of text devoted to TL period in the game
>>just kind of dances around what TL is, only to really say that TL 12- is
>>in one category, and TL13+ is in another (for combat purposes).  That is
>>why I can see TL15 being a possible explanation for the Solomani.
>
>   Wrong...and well, by now *everybody* knows the rest.


Sorry Harold, you can interpret the I:E combat rules any way you want to,
but the plain English version [whose detractors I have told to write GDW
and ask them for a ruling on, though that no longer works :(   ] that I
have only mildly paraphrased above is the way it is.  No IFs ANDs or BUTs.
In I:E, the combat treats TL13+ _all_ _exactly_ the same.


>   It is entirely consistent for Terra to be early TL 15 in 1000, TL 11
>during the Long Night, TL 12 during the RoM, and TL 10-12 during the
>Interstellar Wars.


Well, I promise I'll revisit this later. :)


>>S&A states clearly that the max Solomani TL is 15, an "adjustment" from
>>CT days.  We also need to factor that in for evaluating CT sources, if
>>we are going to be precise about this.
>
>   If this is the best you can do for evidence to support a higher TL
>for the RoM, I'm going to have to insist that you take a Deductive Logic
>course while attending university.


No, the rest of this discussion, which you have accepted the basic
premise of (Terra was TL15 in at the start of the Rim War), is the evidence
and reasoning.  Unfortunately, this phase of the RoM TL discussion is about
consistency with the published universe, and not so much quotes from the
various background sources that was previously discussed, admittedly some
here have tried to make the case (to me unconvincingly) that there were
alternative interpretations.

My interpretations _do_ _not_ _require_ _a_ _reinterpretation_ _of_ _the_
_rules_ and to me, that _is_ _very_ _advantageous_.  I will say this--a
concern foremost in my mind are the ramifications of changes to the
Traveller universe.


>>As an analysis/strategy point, in response to a my "case being weaker",
>>I only focused on the Inv: Earth game, since that is the only post-RoM
>>published source of Terra's TL until 1107/1110.  I:E reinforces the
>>quote of 1107 Terra's TL being 15, which is about as far as they wanted
>>to get specific on the subject.
>
>   While I:E provides us some clues to the TL of Terra c. 1000, it is
>not even remotely a valid source of information for TL info on the RoM. 
>Far too much time had passed between the two eras.


Well, I promise I'll revisit this later. :)


>Harold
>


Leroy Guatney - lwlg@usa.net
 University of Mars, NorthAm Campus
 Class of '98

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 97 19:23:37 -0400
From: Ross Coburn <ross@ican.net>
Subject: Re: combat system in T4.1

Someone suggested leaving the T4.1 combat system alone.  I have a 
counter-proposal:

GET RID OF ALL COMBAT SYSTEMS COMPLETELY!

Listen poepl, this is a matter of my character's life or death.  You 
folks are amused to read about all that Famille Spofulam nonsense; I have 
to LIVE with it.  As may have been previously noted, Roderick Darroch 
freakin' Elliott is our referee (me, Glenn Grant, others), and he 
gleefully pulls all sorts of rot on us, especially me (as traditionally 
it is ME reffing HIM in things, so he cheerfully plots revenge).

If we remove the combat system completely, it just makes it that much 
mroe difficult for him.


Sincerely, 
Ross Coburn (First Officer Amr Santayema)
ross@ican.net

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 97 19:23:37 -0400
From: Ross Coburn <ross@ican.net>
Subject: Re: combat system in T4.1

Someone suggested leaving the T4.1 combat system alone.  I have a 
counter-proposal:

GET RID OF ALL COMBAT SYSTEMS COMPLETELY!

Listen poepl, this is a matter of my character's life or death.  You 
folks are amused to read about all that Famille Spofulam nonsense; I have 
to LIVE with it.  As may have been previously noted, Roderick Darroch 
freakin' Elliott is our referee (me, Glenn Grant, others), and he 
gleefully pulls all sorts of rot on us, especially me (as traditionally 
it is ME reffing HIM in things, so he cheerfully plots revenge).

If we remove the combat system completely, it just makes it that much 
mroe difficult for him.


Sincerely, 
Ross Coburn (First Officer Amr Santayema)
ross@ican.net

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 17:37:00 -0600
From: lguatney@carbon.cudenver.edu (Leroy William Lu Guatney)
Subject: <CT,MT> High Guard Design/Tech Analysis

First of all, I recommend reading my article in JTAS #24, "Refereeing High
Guard and TCS campaigns".  That ish was the last of the small sized JTAS's.
(BTW, though they didn't credit Marc with it, as well, I think Marc and I
spent [my long distance] two phone calls of one hour each, verifying what
I had written, and answering questions about the rules, and I stated so in
the article.

In that article, I presented an alternative to the Book 5 design sequence,
albeit fully compatible with HG.  It is the percentage based checklist in
which I group all percentage based components (i.e. drives, armor, fuel,
bridge [for large enough vessels]) on one list, and tonnage based components
(weapons, screens, staterooms, refinery, etc.) on another.  The tonnage based
components form the "payload".

Familiarity with this approach helps one understand the intricacies of HG
design.  I won't do an actual design here--this is a simplified example to
make the point clearest.

Let's assume procurements wants the following performance:

  J-4   5%
  M-6  17%
  P-9   ?
  Fuel 49% (Jump and Powerplant fuel)

Payload of 15,000 tons, consisting of:

  Crew staterooms, refinery, cargo, weapons systems.

  Assume a Meson-S is to be deployed (allows for TL14 or TL15).

  This means that the powerplant, and the whole design, may be done at
  either TL.

      TL14 TL15
  P-4  18%   9%

Total  89%  80%

Now, there is no particular magic here--just algebra.

   Payload                          15,000
   --------  =  Total(required) =  -------- =  136,363 (TL14)
   11/100                            .11

   Payload                          15,000
   --------  =  Total(required) =  -------- =  75,000 (TL15)
   20/100                            .20


Now Bruce might be saying, but you said 3:1.  That is true.  There are
several reasons this example does not prove that contention.  I would
have to search long and hard for the design I did at the time, but it
was based upon basic Third Imperial design principles (the above does
not take into account for an Armored ship, and most TI were, and it
may very well be that this one is way underpowered to support the
proper contingent.

I assume that Steve Higginbotham did something like the above, as I
independently had, and reached the same conclusion.  (Do you remember
the constructs of every proof you have ever written?  No.  Just the
results are what is important.  Also remember, this is for the ships
of the line, and is _solely_ based upon the difference the powerplant
makes at TL14 vs. TL15.

Cost in High Guard is roughly directly proportional to size, and size is
largely inflated by the requirement for larger powerplants at TL14 as
compared to TL15.  Also, TL15 could boost the Meson Gun to factor-T,
where the TL14 can not.

Given the similarity the MegaTraveller system has to High Guard, this
analysis is advertised as a CT,MT analysis.

BTW, it has been at least 10 years since I did this, so it is possible
that I left something out.  Also, the example I did was a TL15 100Kton
ship, and the "equivalent" TL14 version came out very close, if not
exactly, at 300Kton, hence 3:1, all other things being equal.

Leroy Guatney - lwlg@usa.net
 University of Mars, NorthAm Campus
 Class of '98

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

Date: 24 Aug 1997 00:07:28 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Updated CSC

I've just uploaded a new version of CSC (was v1.0.1b, is now v1.0.2b).  

This version has the adverse/secondary propulsion bug fixed.  

Roderick, the reloads for each weapon should print out - at least they do for
me.  Email methe data file if you are still having trouble.

Oh yes, and I've added a few weapons from EA as well.  Question: were these
designed using the FFS2 system, or Greg Porter's own method?  If the latter,
can they be converted back into real-world units?

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

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 02:00:12 +0100
From: Bruce E J Lewis <bruce@legend.ftech.co.uk>
Subject: Re: alternate tech discussion

At 14:27 22/08/97 PST, Leonard Erickson wrote:
>Why? As I said, they'll be the cheapest way of doing things that have
>to control *electrical* stuff. We still use relays, even relay logic
>circuits, in current equipment. And those are over 100 years old.

	True, it's just that they may be used in very different ways in 100 years
time. However, I don't really dispute your basic premise.
>
>If you have something that works better, is cheaper, and is more
>reliable, then you use that. But sometimes the old stuff works fine. 
>
	I agree, the Russians have been loathe to change what works.

	See ya...


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

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 17:50:34 -0700
From: scharlto@ifsna.com
Subject: Binders and other Trivia

James W. Lindsay, responding to somebody else, said:
>> In regards to the format of T4.1, has anyone ever seen "Advanced Squad
>> Leader" by Avalon Hill.  Their rules are quite unique, presented in a
>> format similar to the old U.S. Army manuals.
>>   All the rules are written in pages that are in a nicely decorated 3
>> ring binder.
>
> You forgot to mention the disadvantage to the ASL rulebook design...
> that of price ($150 CAN minimum just to *play* a game of ASL was a bit
> too much for me to make the switch).


Having worked in the publishing industry in my dark past, I thought I might
speak up on this issue.  The ASL cost is really not a valid argument point,
because there are a bunch of extra factors involved with that one (like you
need to also buy a whole second game to get maps and counters also needed
to play).

I was one of the people who suggested a binder format for T4.  Actually, I
suggested a binder format more for the design rules, but a binder
nonetheless.  At that time, the arguments on the TML against the binder
approach were:

1.  Expense
2.  Complexity
3.  Lack of Consumer Appeal

Issue 1 (Expense) is not really an issue at all.  In fact, the binder
approach is significantly less expensive than the hardcover approach, and
if handled properly can be less expensive than the softcover approach.  In
this case, "handled properly" means minimizing expenses by not having a
printed binder cover (using an insert into a commonly-available binder with
clear insert front and back), and not having the printer put the pages into
the binder for you (a MAJOR increase in cost; this raised the price of a
report I was involved in from $1.75 each to $3.80 each).  In this case, you
either have the contents shrink-wrapped and stuffed into an empty binder
(which is itself shrink-wrapped) OR you get the corporate staff and some
family members together for a binder-stuffing weekend.

Issue 2 (Complexity) is also not an issue.  This again relates to the
approach taken, the amount of pages in the binder, and the size of the
binder itself.  A huge binder is unweildy.  A small binder becomes a pain
when you are forced to "overstuff" it with too many pages.  Putting front
and back page-guides (those little plastic inserts) really helps a lot;
ESPECIALLY if you spend the extra $.0.25 to get the full-page sized page
guides.  One common problem in binders without page guides is that most
binders come with handly little pockets on the inside front and back
covers, which gamers invariably take advantage of.  However, when the book
is opened/closed, the front/back pages will get tangles with the contents
of the pockets, and cause a mess.  Small page guides will also do this
sometimes, but the LARGE page guides will NEVER have this problem.

Issue 3 (Lack of Consumer Appeal) is a VERY LEGITIMATE issue.  A little
history here.  There have been many games released in the binder format.
Most have been small-quantity printings, with very low quality artwork and
production values.  A few of teh industry biggies have also delved into
this; most notably Avalon Hill (Advanced Squad Leader) and TSR (Monstrous
Compendiums).  Both projects used printed binder covers.  The Avalon Hill
binder was actually very good quality, and came with a very nice slipcase
cover, which certainly inflated the cost considerably.  However, most of
the cost of the ASL rules binder is due to the very small print run and the
very high operating expenses Avalon Hill has to deal with.  Remember,
wargames have seriously lost market share, and for Avalon Hill to continue
making wargames for a more limited audience, it has to charge more money
for its product (more even than IG does for T4).  On the other side of the
coin, the TSR effort was very poor quality; the binder was very shoddy, and
the paper contents were so thin and poorly drilled (adding the holes for
the binder) that most copies fell apart after only a few uses.  My FLGS had
many returns on this product due to this problem, and eventually TSR moved
back into the normal hardcover format.

A more recent entrant into all of this is the new edition of Harnmaster
from Columbia Games.  They used the cheaper approach of using "generic"
binders with full-color inserts front and back.  The interior is made up of
very nice near-cardstock paper, which menas the book can be used without
the pages falling out.  If the owner adds a lot of pages to the book, he
can go to the local business supply store, buy a larger generic binder,
move the cover sheets to it, move his contents in, and presto - he has a
book of equal quality to the original.  This book was $30.00, but the
quality and production values of the contents seemed more typical of a
$50.00 product.

All this rambling does have a point - I am not sure a binder approach is
applicable to the basic rules for T4.1, mostly because of the lack of
consumer appeal.  However, there are other T4 things that really SCREAM for
this approach.  Specifically; equipment books (weapons, vehicles,
starships), Technical Architecture books (FF&S, other future add-ons) and
First Survey type books.  All of these share the same element of being
constantly added to, updated, revised or annotated (either by the owner or
by Imperium Games).  The basic rules are self-contained as a basic ruleset;
future expansions and additions are not the basic rules, but are
supplements or advanced rulesets.

Sorry for the length; this is of limited interest to most folks, but think
of how nice it would be to have a binder full of starships, and every issue
of JTAS you cut out or xerox one or two more full-page designs to add to
the book, or you get a few dozen with each new mileu book.  Or you get a
basic equipment guide for Mileu Zero (or for all mileus), and with each
future mileu book or Aliens module you get a few dozen insert pages of
designs valid for that mileu or race.  You only buy the binder once (or
maybe once for starships, once for vehicles, once for equipment, once for
survey data), and you spend a little bit of money with each realease to get
more goodies for your binders.

> Just an idea for consideration by the TML:
Likewise

Steven Charlton

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1738
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Saturday, August 23 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1739



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Ships of the Interstellar Wars (HG)
Re: 
Re: Silly question
Re: T4 rules discussions
Re: RoM/Terran TL
Re: Competency Levels
Re: Marc's Comments on Skill Levels (was Re: Brokers)
Re: Task Resolution
Re: Task Resolution
Re: Starship gravity control
Re: New Proposal for the RoM TL Debate
Re: 3d Blowthrough Rule
Re: Encouraging Rob....
Re: Task Resolution
Re: What I'd like to see--Task Resolution
Re: Competency Levels
Re: 3d Blowthrough Rule

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 19:08:46 -0600
From: lguatney@carbon.cudenver.edu (Leroy William Lu Guatney)
Subject: Re: Ships of the Interstellar Wars (HG)

See the above "Re: " subjectless post. Oh well. <G>

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 19:07:25 -0600
From: lguatney@carbon.cudenver.edu (Leroy William Lu Guatney)
Subject: Re: 

On Sat, 23 Aug 1997 00:53:08 +1200
Andrew Moffatt-Vallance <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz> writes:
>Subject: Re: Ships of the Interstellar Wars (HG)
>
>>Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 01:52:01 -0600
>>From: lguatney@carbon.cudenver.edu (Leroy William Lu Guatney)
>>Subject: <CT,MT> Vilani/Terran ships of the First Interstellar War
>
>>I was just purusing the tables in HIGH GUARD (remember that in terms of
>>ship design, especially at these TL, there is not much difference between
>>CT and MT) and came up with the following:
>
>This is a facinating post. Unfortunately you've made a small error in reading
>the High Guard rules and ignored a very important factor regarding the Vilani
>in the Interstellar Wars.


Well, I have four High Guards right now.  There is the First printing safely
stowed away, the Second printing with the not-missing, but not-attached,
cover that I use all the time (the one I shall quote from here), the Mint
copy, and the one I got that is for sale (and yes, I have already received
a request for one, that I have not had a chance to reply to, due to a
horrendously busy schedule the past few days).

In my coverless edition, it says (excerpted, and re-formated on purpose):

  Page 23        Page 26
                 Computers
    Tonnage          Model    Ship   TL
      D  4,000         3        D     9
      E  5,000
      F  6,000
      G  7,000
      H  8,000
      J  9,000
      K 10,000         4        K    10 (A)
      L 20,000
      M 30,000
      N 40,000
      P 50,000         5        P    11 (B)
      Q 75,000

The relevant textual quotes are:
  pg.28 "Computers...Ship size shows the hull tonnage code which requires
         this computer model as a minimum; for example, a 10,000 ton ship
         has hull code K, and requires at least a Model/4 computer be
         installed. Tech level shows the minimum tech level required to
         build the indicated computer."
  pg.22 "Each specific tonnage level includes all values between it and
         the next highest level stated. Thus, tonnage A includes all
         tonnage code A includes all tonnages from 1,000 to 1,999 tons.

Who made the small error? <G>  BTW, you may notice from one of my earlier
posts, before I read this one, that I am in the High Guard pantheon. <G>

Just for clarity, _the_ maximum size for a TL9 ship, Terran or not, is
4,999 tons.  With my own house rule, I drop that to 4,900 tons but that
either value still does not allow for Terrans to mount Spinal mounts.

Notice, also, all those Missile Boats in Imperium that are _soooooo_
effective using High Intensity fire against those Vilani BBs they get
later, or on appeal to the Emperor.

Andrew, I enjoyed the mythical Early Terran Battleship, but let's have
one that is legal.  I am sorry that I was behind, but as fate would have
it, the exact first digest I started reading today was the one with
this (your) note in it, and one of the last was your tech level 9 10KT
Terran battleship.  Hey, we could get a referee on the list and run a
line of battle. <G> (Just kidding, by the time we had any conclusion to
the battle, Marc will be talking M3000, and we'll all be cherishing those
out of print E21 sourcebooks. :)


>First the minor error. You've misread the rule regarding ship size and
>computers. The rule state that a ship of a certain size requires a certain
>model of computer as a minimum. At TL 9 the best computer you can build is a
>Model/3, at TL 11 its a Model/5. Now a 5,000T ship requires a Model/3 and a
>10,000T requires a Model/4; a 50,000T ship requires a Model/5 and a 100,000T
>ship requires a Model/6. Therefore the Terrans can build any ship smaller than
>10,000T and the Vilani any ship smaller than 100,000T.


I think what you are trying to say is that size D includes size E-J, which I
do not agree with.

The max ship size for TL11, Vilani or otherwise is 74,999 (my house rule is
74,900).


>However more importantly, the Terrans are not fighting the central Vilani
>fleet, they are fighting the provincial governors fleet. In the game Imperium
>which simulates the the Interstellar Wars we find that the provincial
>governor is prohibited from building any ship larger than a light cruiser. So
>the Terrans are not facing the largest ships the  Vilani can build. The
>question here is how big is a Vilani light cruiser? If we assumes that Vilani
>capital ships are around 60,000T to 80,000T and their heavy cruisers around
>40,000T to 50,000T, I'd hazzard a guess that Vilani light cruisers are in the
>20,000T to 30,000T range. This makes the Terrans and Vilani a much closer match
>than pure TL analysis would indicate. At this size in HG the best weapons are
>missile bays (fits with Vilani ships high missile factors in Imperium).


Given the assessment and the problem of interpreting the rules, you do make
a good point about the nature of the Imperium game.  However, the vastly
restrictive ship sizes that both sides have, there is little point in trying
to talk Capital ship, unless you accept it as an Ersha class, from my earlier
post.

Then, given that the FIW was not too decisive, since the Vilani just have to
keep coming back, they'll eventually capture all the Terran ships, repair
the maneuver drives, and the only thing left for the Terrans to do is build
more ships.  Hell, with Armor-11, the Vilani could start ramming the Terran
ships--it just depends on how fast they build, or have accumulated the
Ersha class.  They might be able to field 1:1 for Terran ships, and any
Armor-11 ship would do, it wouldn't have to be the flagship. <G>


>Now this gives an interesting possibility. In Imperium, Vilani ships are mostly
>charecterised by high missile factors and Terran ships by high beam factors.
>I'm not sure and I don't have time to do the design at the moment, but I
>believe you can design a jump capable ship mounting a factor-B spinal PA at
>tech level 9 under High Guard (at TL 9 a B PA masses 5000T plus 2000T power
>plant and fuel). I think this can be made to fit in a 9,900T hull. To be sure,
>its not a very good ship, but it can be done and would come as a suprise to the
>Vilani who have only ever encountered opponents who have received their
>technology and tactics from the Vilani themselves (a GIGO situation). Such a
>hypothesis would go a long way towards explaining why the Terrans where able
>to survive the First Interstellar War.


I like your overall reasoning, I guess I am just having a difficult time
justifying it under HG rules.


>However, as a final proviso, all this is of course mute, as High Guard has long
>been retired as the "offical" ship design system (despite that fact, I do love
>it and will continue to use it)


I love it too.  I only brought it up since my proposals about the Early
Terran and RoM tech levels brought about cat calls about T4 not being
compatible with CT.  In this case, if they are going to force bad cannon down
our throats, then we should point out just exactly what CT says about this
pet theory that the Terrans were TL9.  I am surprised that nobody is flaming
you for trying to mess with High Guard, properly one of the CT bibles. <G>

Also, to show that your interpretation of the HG Computer rules is not lost
on me, I am going to adopt them as part of my own House rules since I still
use HG.  To tell you the truth, I think HG had as it's focus, design of
ships in the TL12-TL15 range, another telling fact of the RoM/Terra TL
discussion--Interstellar states must be TL12 to handle what goes with the
turf.


>/mode=humour
>"QSDS, SSDS, FF&S2; piffle, in my day we used High Guard, crumpled fish'n'chip
>paper and a burnt stick to write on it, you youn'uns just don't know when
>you've got it good"


:)

Since J.P. is one of my players, and the flame of FF&S2 started,
I stopped giving him digests on floppy.  But that didn't stop him from
pointing out that QSDS, SSDS, and FF&S2 all need spreadsheets, and to be
done "right", should all be done together.  I have a feeling, if I break
it to my players that we're leaving HG behind, I'm gonna be in trouble. :(

I guess that could be good or bad.


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

Thank You for your well thought out post.  Your creativity may put you
into the HG pantheon too. <G>


Leroy Guatney - lwlg@usa.net
 University of Mars, NorthAm Campus
 Class of '98

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 21:32:37 -0400 (EDT)
From: SemoFetus@aol.com
Subject: Re: Silly question

Erwin Fritz said:

>Ahhhh, stuff like this is why I subscribe to this list. Yep, another
>excellent entry for my equipment list!


Glad I could make your day, Erwin :)

Semo

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 21:27:47 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: T4 rules discussions

In a message dated 97-08-23 16:26:44 EDT, you write:

<< 
 That's the thing Rob, if Marc has made up his mind firmly about specific
 portions of the rules, I wish he would tell us what he's decided and say,
 "No more discussion on this topic is requested at this time."  As it stands
 now, I'm not sure what he's decided and what he's still open to
 modification on. 
 
  >>
The task chapter draft reflects my thinking on tasks.

Marc

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 20:31:51 -0700
From: David Smart <dsmart@flash.net>
Subject: Re: RoM/Terran TL

Andrew Boulton wrote:
> 
> Bruce,
> 
> > (Does anyone with access to Supplement 10 remember if there were any TL-15
> > worlds on the Solomani side of the border even in 1107?)
> 
> Don't have it handy, but I'm 99% sure no.

Actually there are. Scandia Subsector (home to the Cymbeline system) has
4.

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 21:27:02 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Competency Levels

In a message dated 97-08-23 12:13:00 EDT, you write:

<< 
 >I would further contend that NO Beginner (no matter how naturally talented)
 >should have a better chance of success than a Competent Professional of
 >*average* natural ability.  OTOH, a naturally talented Beginner should have
 >as good (or even a better) chance of success than a Journeyman of average
 >natural ability.
  >>

When you define beginner as 

A. unskilled (can't attempt the task anyway), or
B. default skill level -0, with characteristic halved,

then a beginner has a considerably lower chance than a competent profesisonal
with average natural ability.

Marc

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 21:27:14 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Marc's Comments on Skill Levels (was Re: Brokers)

In a message dated 97-08-23 17:25:46 EDT, you write:

<< 
 Marc, you also mentioned how in MT and CT advanced char gen
 character's received 1-1.25 skills/term and that in T4.1 they also
 receive 1.25 skills/term.
 
 If this is the case why change the skill level meanings?  In CT/MT 
  >>

Because the skill level meanings were written for CT basic, not advanced or
enhanced. That just made the advanced characters more powerful.

That's why I tend toward competency testing.

And that's why advenced character generation for T4 will be more concerned
with life events and reasons why the chargen went the way it did than with
giving the character more skills.

Marc Miller

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 21:27:20 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

In a message dated 97-08-23 18:26:23 EDT, you write:

<< 
 Wouldn't it be better to define skill levels based on the final
 target number?  A pilot is going to be regarded as competant
 based on his ability to perform, not on how many hours he
 has had some teacher jabber at him.  A Dex 3 character is
 going to have to do a lot more to pass the pilots test than
 a Dex 11 character.
 
  >>
This is precisely right (and what the furor over national school testing is
about). Regardless of skill level, competency is what I would want in the
crew of the starship carrying ME.

So the standard for getting hired as a crewpersonis whether he or she can do
the job.

Competency Testing
	A candidate for a position must demonstrate that he or she can succeed at
various tasks associated with the position. average tasks at the 90 th
percentile. To accomplish this, the sum of skill level and one of the
associated characteristics must equal 10 or more.

Position	Prime Skill	(Char)	Req S+C	Collateral Skills
Pilot	Pilot	(Int, Edu)	10	(or whatever)
etc.

Marc Miller

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 21:27:12 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

In a message dated 97-08-23 17:36:28 EDT, you write:

<< 
 > 1. It uses the half die.
 > I may not know art but I know what I do not like; And it is D3's. It also
 > does not have the same effect on the bell curve as would a normal die 6
 >  
  >>
Here is the actual expected statistics table for tasks (including 2.5D for
Difficult).

CHANCE OF TASK SUCCESS
		Easy	Avg	Diff	For	Sta	Imp	Hop
S+C	1D	2D	2.5D	3D	4D	5D 	6D
	1	17%	-	-	-	-	-	-
	2	33%	3%	-	-	-	-	-
	3	50%	8%	1%	<1%	-	-	-
	4	67%	17%	4%	2%	<1%	-	-
	5	83%	28%	9%	5%	<1%	<1%	-
	6	100%	42%	18%	9%	1%	<1%	<1%
	7	-	58%	29%	16%	3%	<1%	<1%
	8	-	72%	43%	26%	5%	1%	<1%
	9	-	83%	57%	38%	10%	2%	<1%
	10	-	92%	71%	50%	16%	3%	<1%
	11	-	97%	82%	63%	24%	6%	1%
	12	-	100%	91%	74%	34%	10%	2%
	13	-	-	96%	84%	44%	15%	4%
	14	-	-	99%	91%	56%	22%	6%
	15	-	-	100%	95%	66%	31%	10%
	16	-	-	-	98%	76%	40%	15%
	17	-	-	-	100%	84%	50%	21%
	18	-	-	-	-	90%	60%	28%
	19	-	-	-	-	95%	70%	36%
	20	-	-	-	-	97%	78%	45%
	21	-	-	-	-	99%	85%	55%
	22	-	-	-	-	100%	90%	64%
	23	-	-	-	-	-	94%	72%
	24	-	-	-	-	-	97%	79%
	25	-	-	-	-	-	98%	86%
	26	-	-	-	-	-	99%	90%
	27	-	-	-	-	-	99% 	94%
Add Skill (S) and characteristic (C) to read the percentage chance for
success for each difficulty level. For example Skill-5 and Characteristic-4
produces S+C of 9. Read the probability of success at Formidable Difficulty
as 38%.

A task with a default skill would use 0.5C instead of S+C.

Marc Miller

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 97 20:42:39 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: Starship gravity control

On 08/23/97 at 08:49 PM,  aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
said:

>> Now, I always took this to mean that every cabin had a little dial by
>> the door marked "Gravity" along with the ones marked "Temperature",
>> "Air Pressure", and so on, and that the passengers could set their
>> own inside their caibn..  I'm perfectly comfortable with the
>> idea that the crew can override the local gravity control from the bridge.

I hope you make it a little harder to fiddle with than that!  If I just let
it be a dial by the door, then somebody would reach in and give it quick
twist one way then the other.  Ha! Ha! Good joke, huh? ;->

I have the cabin's controls require them to key in a password input (with
Command Crew having Master Overrides) before you can adjust anything other
than light. The password  is used to lock and unlock the door as well. It
is set to the cabin number originally, and the passenger can change it to
anything they would like.


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

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 18:47:57 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: New Proposal for the RoM TL Debate

At 05:12 PM 8/23/97 -0500, you wrote:
>Quoth Douglas E. Berry:
>> I place the TL14 vacc suits in "Anomalies" in that category: a mistake.
>> Make them TL13 and I can buy the premise, since it would make sense that
>> the Navy-dominated RoM would develop cutting edge space equipment before
>> the Long Night.
>
>Did we ever decide if it's reasonable for TL13/14 equipment to last for
>1700 years in storage, and still remain usable?  That, as much as the
>canon discrepancy, is what bugs me about the adventure.

That's still a sticking point, but I can forsee that it might be possible
that properly stored, the Vacc Suits might still be usuable after two milennia.
- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 18:43:48 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: 3d Blowthrough Rule

At 01:14 PM 8/23/97 -0500, you wrote:

>>> No, don't kill it, include a few more exceptions to the rule
>>> (explosive ammo, energy weapons, etc).  Either that or eliminate it as
>>> a general rule and have it apply to only those methods of attack for
>>> which it makes more sense (300 m/s and greater projectile weapons).
>
>>I agree with James here.  Originally, I didn't like the rule--but  that
>>was because I did not understand it.
>
>I understand the reasoning behind the blowthrough rule too, but why 3d? 
>Why not 4d?  
>
>Why not a different number of dice based on the bulk of the target?
>Something like: for human sized targets, 4d; for smaller targets 2d; for
>larger targets 5d; for elephants and whales 6d; etc.

I'm just at that point in TACS, and right now I'm leaning towards having
work like this:

1-25kg    1D6
26-50kg   2D6
51-100kg  3D6
101-200kg 4D6
etc..

This puts the majority of humans in the 3D6 range.

As for what is affected by blowthrough; bullets, lasers, and fragments are
subject to the blowthrough rule, while explosions and plasma/fusion weapons
are not.

Comments?  I know I said I'd have TACs out by tonight, but I want to make
sure I've covered everything.
- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 21:59:22 -0400
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: Re: Encouraging Rob....

Doug Berry wrote:

>
>>Rob Prior wrote:
>>>
>>>>	Now what the Mac-using Trav community really needs, though, is for
>>>>Rob to write up a similar application, but for FF&S2 (I'm drooling at the
>>>>thought) :).
>>>
>>>I'm working on it.  Early completion of this project would be greatly
>>>enhanced by large and regular contributions of money.
>>
>>	Well, actually, I was thinking about sending you a six-pack of
>>Trois-Pistoles, the latest from Quebec Microbrewery Unibroue.  Visualize
>>Guiness brewed by Famille Spofulam and you'll get the concept quite nicely
>>:).
>
>For this, I would learn to code for a Mac....


	Well, actually, while it's pretty nice beer it's not quite worth
switching platforms over.  It's not the world's greatest stout (it's a wee
bit pale for that), but it does pack one hell of a punch.  It's alcohol
content is 9%, almost double normal Canadian beer, which is generally more
powerful than U.S. beer IIRC.  And it goes down pretty smoothly.  So
basically, you're getting twice as drunk off the same number of beers.  I'm
6'2", 230 lbs or so, and two Trois-Pistoles got me surprisingly bagged the
other night.  They kind of sneak up on you; it's a speed thing more than
anything else, I think :).

	Another Unibroue beer that you (or Rob) might get a kick out of is
called "Maudite", Tr: "the damned one".  The label has a picture (in reds
and oranges) of a bunch of lumberjacks in a canoe flying over Montreal
circa 1820 or so, and a great big glowering batwinged devil (who looks a
lot like one of my brothers in law) with his arms crossed at the bottom.
It's only about 7-8%, but is eminently drinkable and an interesting deep
red colour; I think it's a wheat beer.  And it has a real plus in that the
packaging would make the pope's (or Billy Graham's) head explode :).


>
>>	Would an alcoholic coma and colossal hangover slow down the coding
>>process <innocent grin>?
>
>It's funny, but i've gotten more writing done in the last few days on
>massive doses of Prednisone than I've accomplished in months.  Of course,
>85% of it makes the works of William S. Burroughs look like "Dick and Jane
>go to Sylea", but some of it is worthwhile.


	Big grin on that one :)


>
>I was chatting with a net friend who runs a microbrewery in Oregon.. he's
>offered to do a run of Scout Brew if I design and print up the labels.  now
>we have to have a Traveller Con!
>
>Let's drink to excess!
>
>To EXCESS!!!!  *clink*

	To _WRETCHED_ excess!

Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 97 21:28:21 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

On 08/23/97 at 05:58 PM,  Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com> said:

>> My vote would be to lose the D3 and use (stat/2)+skill. This would reduce the
>> dominance of stats over skills, and in the process make tasks harder.

>The problem with using a method of dividing stats is that stats change in
>combat.  When your character gets wounded, you have to recalculate again.

>That's why I went with multiplying the skill (instead of dividing the
>stat) in KBv2.0.  

What are you doing talking about KB2?  You aren't going to use
that...remember? You are going to use the d3 and a flat Stat+Skill, or are
you just playing "dog in the manger?" ;->


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

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

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 97 21:23:44 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: What I'd like to see--Task Resolution

On 08/23/97 at 05:49 PM,  Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com> said:

>> So, tell the truth Ken, are you still going to use KB2? ;->

>I really don't want to, but it depends on if Marc fixes the problem of
>characteristics having too much influence over skills with regard to
>success at tasks.

Ok, what constitutes a fix of "the problem of characteristics having too
much influence over skills", IYO?

As I've said before Task Resolution and CharGen are tied together.  You
can't change one without affecting the other, and you can't "fix" one
without having to "fix" the other.

Looking at Marc's draft of CharGen, I just don't see that much difference
(if effect) from T4.  The scale of characteristics is still 2 to 15, and an
INT or DEX of 10+ is still going to have the same effect on Average and
Difficult task it had in T4.  There are actually fewer Background/Homeworld
skills.  All the tasks of careers (enroll, promotion, injury, etc) are
still like they were in T4..the numbers changed but the technique is still
not based on the Task System.  The number of skills per term hasn't been
changed from T4, it's still 1/year plus 1 for Commission and 1 for
Promotions.  There are a couple more Career skills, but that's about it. 
The escalating EDU problem has been toned down, but you will still have a
lot of PC's with an EDU of 9+. From the character's I've generated the
range of skills is still pretty much the same as T4, too.  Have you
actually created any characters using Marc's draft of CharGen?

Given that the characters coming out of CharGen are going to be very much
like those coming out of T4, as I see it, any perceived problem of Stat vs
Skill that existed in T4 will still be perceived to exist in T4.1.


Eris
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 97 21:48:53 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: Competency Levels

On 08/23/97 at 09:27 PM,  CardSharks@aol.com said:

>I would further contend that NO Beginner (no matter how naturally
>talented) should have a better chance of success than a Competent
>Professional of *average* natural ability.  OTOH, a naturally talented
>Beginner should have as good (or even a better) chance of success than a
>Journeyman of average natural ability.

>When you define beginner as 

>A. unskilled (can't attempt the task anyway), or
>B. default skill level -0, with characteristic halved,

>then a beginner has a considerably lower chance than a competent
>profesisonal with average natural ability.

I don't define a beginner as someone at unskilled or even default level.
That person would be, in the former case "no skill", and in the later case
"unskilled."  I define a beginner as some one who has just begun to be
trained in a skill, a first year student if you will, ie skill 1.


Eris
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 97 22:03:45 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: 3d Blowthrough Rule

On 08/23/97 at 06:43 PM,  "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net> said:

>I'm just at that point in TACS, and right now I'm leaning towards having
>work like this:

>1-25kg    1D6
>26-50kg   2D6
>51-100kg  3D6
>101-200kg 4D6
>etc..

>This puts the majority of humans in the 3D6 range.

And most Vargr at 2d6, Aslan at 4d6, etc. I like it, and the breaks look OK
to me.

>As for what is affected by blowthrough; bullets, lasers, and fragments are
>subject to the blowthrough rule, while explosions and plasma/fusion
>weapons are not.

I'm of mixed mind on lasers.  In 3G3, Greg Porter, discribes the effect of
a laser on flesh more like a steam explosion than a puncture like a high
velocity bullet.  It *might* be that lasers deposit more of their energy in
watery flesh than they would burning/punching through metal.  

Heavy low velocity projectiles probably shouldn't "blowthrough" either.
They may not have the energy to punch all the way through, but because of
their size do massive damage inside a body.

I'm no expert, though, just something to think about.

Eris
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1739
***********************************
Traveller-digest      Sunday, August 24 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1740



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Updated CSC
Re: combat system in T4.1
Re: Task Resolution( Very Pilot Specific)
Re: RoM/Terran TL
New Task System Suggestion
Re: ARRRRGGGHH!!! Mk. II
Re: RoM/Terra TL
Re: New Proposal for the RoM TL Debate
Re: Early Charges?
Re: 3d Blowthrough Rule
Re: What I'd like to see--Task Resolution
Re: Task Resolution
Re: Ships of the Interstellar Wars (HG)
Re: RoM/Terran TL
Re: Encouraging Rob....
Re: Early Charges?
Re: "Duplicate" skills
Re: Phil and Dixie
Re: History skill
Re: Zero-G Nappy Time 

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 23:19:59 -0400
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: Re: Updated CSC

Rob wrote:

>
>I've just uploaded a new version of CSC (was v1.0.1b, is now v1.0.2b).
>
>This version has the adverse/secondary propulsion bug fixed.
>
>Roderick, the reloads for each weapon should print out - at least they do for
>me.  Email methe data file if you are still having trouble.


	Roger wilco.  Will proceed to download and futz around.


>
>Oh yes, and I've added a few weapons from EA as well.  Question: were these
>designed using the FFS2 system, or Greg Porter's own method?  If the latter,
>can they be converted back into real-world units?


	They were probably done using Greg's system, since FF&S2 only got
written after EA was released.  Apparently 3G3 (Greg's system) was superior
to FF&S1 in many respects, and from what I can tell, so is FF&S2, so
quality/consistency ought not tobe that big of a problem.


Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 23:16:53 -0400
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: Re: combat system in T4.1

Ross wrote:

>
>Someone suggested leaving the T4.1 combat system alone.  I have a
>counter-proposal:
>
>GET RID OF ALL COMBAT SYSTEMS COMPLETELY!
>
>Listen poepl, this is a matter of my character's life or death.  You
>folks are amused to read about all that Famille Spofulam nonsense; I have
>to LIVE with it.


	But Ross, it's all there for you; the Spofulam ship, the Spofulam
arsenal in the ship's locker, the Spofulam multibarrel autoshotgun from
hell on the ship's APV...  Let's face it; your average player would just
_love_ how generous I am with the technotoys.  But do I ever get any thanks
for it?  Noooo... nothing but kvetching all day long :).


>As may have been previously noted, Roderick Darroch
>freakin' Elliott is our referee (me, Glenn Grant, others), and he
>gleefully pulls all sorts of rot on us, especially me (as traditionally
>it is ME reffing HIM in things, so he cheerfully plots revenge).


	Strangely enough, however, the first character Ross played in a
game I reffed was revenge directed at *ME* for one character in particular.
Ask him about Mick Adams, sociopathic Hemingway in-joke extraordinare,
sometime and then I'll tell you about Lt. Eamon "cricket with grenades"
Dunhill :).  You guys can judge :).


>
>If we remove the combat system completely, it just makes it that much
>mroe difficult for him.

	Yeah; I'd have to make one up entirely by myself.  Think about the
possibilities inherent in that for a bit.

Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 22:33:56 -0500
From: deadeye@ebicom.net
Subject: Re: Task Resolution( Very Pilot Specific)

> 
> Competency Testing
>         A candidate for a position must demonstrate that he or she can succeed at
> various tasks associated with the position. average tasks at the 90 th
> percentile. To accomplish this, the sum of skill level and one of the
> associated characteristics must equal 10 or more.
> 
> Position        Prime Skill     (Char)  Req S+C Collateral Skills
> Pilot   Pilot   (Int, Edu)      10      (or whatever)
> etc.
> 
> Marc Miller


This is called a check ride.  Pilots have one about one per year.  Other
no-notice checks also come up randomly.  The real basis of "competency"
is really from peer approval, even though check rides are a requisite to
move on and up. 

Depending on the period and place they may be broad and objective or
VERY piddly ass detailed, with a bust for a minor, stupid detail that
has little to do with flying skill.  However, the testing idea is
valid-pilots are constantly being evaluated in one way or another.  Sort
of like every day of your life is a test.

BTW, your airlines use a seniority system based on hiring year.  You
advance soley on your time in the airline.  Period.  Of course the
average flight time is 5000+ hours for new hires, (or 2500 hrs previous
military.) Most of the ner do wells are long gone. And there are still
check rides.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 00:58:15 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: Re: RoM/Terran TL

David Smart writes: 
 
>> > (Does anyone with access to Supplement 10 remember if there were any TL-15
>> > worlds on the Solomani side of the border even in 1107?)
>> 
>> Don't have it handy, but I'm 99% sure no.
>
>Actually there are. Scandia Subsector (home to the Cymbeline system) has
>4.

   Better recheck your map.  All the worlds in that subsector are
**Imperial** property in 1107.

Regards,

Harold

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 21:07:21 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: New Task System Suggestion

How about a system in which charecters would take stat + skill level d6
for greater than or equal to a target number. 

So if a charecter with Edu=9 and Engineering-3 was trying to fix the
Engines on her starship she would roll 9+3d6 against a difficulty level.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 01:47:19 -0400
From: Mark Urbin <eclipse@ultranet.com>
Subject: Re: ARRRRGGGHH!!! Mk. II

Mr. Berry typed:
>>Even in MT, this is what we had. I do not WANT and should not HAVE to
>>consult countless errata and download countless spreadsheets to include
>>the most basic of items in my campaign.
>
>MegaTraveller.  Not having to consult errata.  Excuse me while I laugh
>myself sick for the next ten minutes.

Careful there.  Try to stay healthy.  At least what passes for healthy with
you. :-)

I remember when MT came out.  My group, with more than it's fair share of
CT players, bought it, found it soooo bug ridden that we passed on it.  You
couldn't even design working starships with the first edition books.  Years
later I printed out the accumulated errata.  It was over an inch thick.


- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
eclipse@ultranet.com -- These opinions are mine, no one else wants `em.
Vikings? There ain't no vikings here. Just us honest farmers. The town was 
burning, the villagers were dead. They didn't need those sheep anyway. 
That's our story and we're sticking to it.  
                 http://www.ultranet.com/~eclipse/
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 02:04:06 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: Re: RoM/Terra TL

Leroy William Lu Guatney writes:

>Not really.  The Imperium has _always_ (M1100) had a diversified range of
>Tech Level equipment/troops/ships that were deployed.

   Well let's see, _101 Vehicles_ (MT) has the following to say:

   "The Trepida class became the standard issue Imperial grav tank (at
least at the high end of the technology level scale) in 1109, and is
widely distributed throughout the Imperium."

   The Trepida of course being the TL 14 main battle tank of Imperial
forces.

   "The Astrin class grav armored personnel carrier was developed as a
companion to the Trepida grav tank to carry troops into battle.  Its
deployment has followed the Trepida by about three years."

   The Astrin is the TL 14 grav APC of Imperial forces.

   We also know from various older sources that the FGMP-14 was the
primary infantry weapon of battledress troops (the FGMP-15 serving as a
support weapon).

   THe FGMP-14 is the 56th century equivalent of the American M-16A1
rifle.  

   Now, if the standard main battle tank, APC, and standard infantry
"rifle" are *all* TL 14, what would that mean for the force as a whole?

   Look, it makes more sense to equip Imperial troops at TL 14 in 1116
(not to mention 1000) rather than TL 15.  For one, there are a lot more
TL 14 worlds (thus more worlds you can get supplies from) than TL 15 in
the Imperium.  For another, because there are fewer TL 15 worlds, if you
insist on going with TL 15 hardware your logistics lines are going to
have to be longer if you are going to run anything resembling a
prolonged campaign (say invading a rebellious province).

   As for the I:E era, what few TL 15 worlds there might be in the
Imperium couldn't hope to begin to supply the entire Imperial Army or
even Marines.  As for the Solomani, with one TL 15 world (Terra, and
that's a gift I'm handing you), you are even in a worse position.  More
than likely, the Solomani are still fielding large amounts of TL 13
equipment (evidenced by _101 Vehicles_ though I admit it is not as
complete a source as I would like).

>>   Your assumption is that the Terrans were fighting the largest Vilani
>>warships, which IIRC was not the case early on.   Just as the U.S.
>>didn't throw its full weight into the Vietnam War, the Vilani held out
>>its best forces.
>
>Not an assumption.  Just best case scenarios for _both_ sides.

   But the Vilani were acknowledged by "historians" to be fighting in *a
worst case scenario*.

>>   What was the name of that world?
>
>Please note that I am several digests behind and this may have been answered
>already.  I barely found it given that we just got done have three large rooms
>of our house steam cleaned today.  I decided it was mandatory to post this
>given the past experience with "post your sources, post yur sources, I said
>post ure damned sources". :)  But what the hey, I did say where it was printed
>didn't I.  And Hey, at least _I_ read this stuff. :)
>
>Darsei/Aldebaran 1401 (A765845-F)
>
>It was in the MT article on the Bootean Federation.  The Imperial Lines
>newsletters where distributed with late MT (perhaps early TNE) products
>from GDW.

   Actually I wasn't somuch interested in you proving your sources on
this as I was genuinely interested in the information for my ongoing
Aldebaran project.  Thanks.

>Exactly, and you can still point to the fact that MT redid the whole
>Solomani Sphere as a max. TL15, rather than the previous TL14.
>Just add +1 to relevant CT sources that may have been written before
>the "change."

   Leroy, the reason for the change in TL of *some* (not all, see the
TNS items for worlds in the Solomani Rim during the Rebellion era)
worlds is the natural progression of those Solomani worlds from TL 14 to
15 which had occured between 1107 and 1117.  It is entirely possible
that those Solomani worlds that did go up in TL did so because of the
rape of captured TL 15 Imperial worlds (ones that resisted the Solomani
Party), where industrial manufacturing equipment etc. was carted off by
transports to "loyal" worlds back in the Confederation.

   For historical parallels, if I'm not mistaken, our European friends
can testify to what the Soviets did to Occupied Germany.

>>   While I:E provides us some clues to the TL of Terra c. 1000, it is
>>not even remotely a valid source of information for TL info on the RoM. 
>>Far too much time had passed between the two eras.
>
>Well, I promise I'll revisit this later. :)

   Where have I heard this before?

Regards,

Harold

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 02:15:31 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: Re: New Proposal for the RoM TL Debate

Dan Lane wrote:

>How about framing this debate in the setting of Milieu 0 or Milieu
>1100?  

   I believe that *some time ago* I thought it would perfect sense if
certain Ancients sites (or at least people in 1116 know that they are
Ancients sites) were mistakenly attributed back in Year 0 to the RoM.

   I further said that it would make perfect sense that there would be
*rumors* of TL 13+ RoM equipment which turned out to actually be TL 12
or to be Ancients artifacts mistakenly attributed to the RoM.

   I also said that if these ideas were put into play in MMT, that the
Referee's Notes should indicate the true origins/TL of the sites/items.

   When I said these things, they were basically ignored, even though it
would have solved a lot of the RoM TL debate.  It's somewhat comforting
to see now that people like Leroy and Dan are finally coming around....

Regards,

Harold

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 03:10:40 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: Re: Early Charges?

Alex Ingram asks:

>What is the Traveller Chronicle, how long has it been around, and where
>I can get it?

   Cue shameless plug!!!

   Traveller Chronicle is a magazine started by Kevin Knight back in the
early 1990s.  Currently 12 issues have been published with a 13th under
production.  Traveller Chronicle's motto is "bringing you Traveller in
all its forms."  This includes CT, MT, TNE, and MMT.  Each issues is 56
pages long and has a color cover (this ain't a newsletter).

   Distributors that carry Sword of the Knight products: Berkley;
Blackhawk; Chessex ; Evergreen; Esdevium; FanPro ; Greenfield; Hobby
Games, US; Liberty Hobby Distributors; Phoenix Hobby Distributors; RPV
Distributors; TD Imports 

   One of these should distribute to a FLGS near you.

   You can also contact Kevin about subscription information at:

Address: 
     Sword of the Knight Publications
     2820 Sunset Lane #116
     Henderson, KY 42420 USA
Voice/Fax: 
     502-826-1218
Internet: 
     swrdknght@aol.com
Web Page: 
     http://members.aol.com/swrdknght/sok.htm

Regards,

Harold

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 02:59:48 +0000
From: Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: 3d Blowthrough Rule

Douglas E. Berry wrote:

> I'm just at that point in TACS, and right now I'm leaning towards having
> work like this:

> Comments?  

I've been away for a while.  What is TACS?

Kenneth.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 03:04:06 +0000
From: Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: What I'd like to see--Task Resolution

Eris Reddoch wrote:

> Ok, what constitutes a fix of "the problem of characteristics having too
> much influence over skills", IYO?

Simple.  T4.1 has to survive this test:

Edu-7, Medical-4 character has a better chance of success than a Edu-11,
Medical-1 character.

When that happens, I'll consider the problem fixed.

Kenneth.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 02:57:51 +0000
From: Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

Eris Reddoch wrote:
 
> What are you doing talking about KB2?  You aren't going to use
> that...remember?

I guess you are joking, right?  I said I'll use Marc's system if it
fixes the problems of Char vs Skill.

I'll compare what Marc has done to my system.  If what he comes up with
is better than what I've produced, I'll use that.  If it is not as good
as KBv2.0, then I'm sticking with my system because it fixes the
problems I want to fix, it is extensively playtested, and it works.

 You are going to use the d3 and a flat Stat+Skill, or are
> you just playing "dog in the manger?" ;->

What is dog in the manager?

Kenneth.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 23:14:12 +1200
From: Andrew Moffatt-Vallance <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Ships of the Interstellar Wars (HG)

>Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 19:07:25 -0600
>From: lguatney@carbon.cudenver.edu (Leroy William Lu Guatney)
>Subject: Re: 

>>This is a facinating post. Unfortunately you've made a small error in reading
>>the High Guard rules and ignored a very important factor regarding the Vilani
>>in the Interstellar Wars.

>Well, I have four High Guards right now.  There is the First printing safely
>stowed away, the Second printing with the not-missing, but not-attached,
>cover that I use all the time (the one I shall quote from here), the Mint
>copy, and the one I got that is for sale (and yes, I have already received
>a request for one, that I have not had a chance to reply to, due to a
>horrendously busy schedule the past few days).

I only have one (2nd edition). To save wear and tear; I photocopied it,
the four JTAS articles (including yours BTW), and parts of TCS. Then bound
them altogether. I've been using that since 1989; when it finally wears out,
I'll probably copy them again.

[snip]

>Andrew, I enjoyed the mythical Early Terran Battleship, but let's have
>one that is legal.  I am sorry that I was behind, but as fate would have
>it, the exact first digest I started reading today was the one with
>this (your) note in it, and one of the last was your tech level 9 10KT
>Terran battleship.  Hey, we could get a referee on the list and run a
>line of battle. <G> (Just kidding, by the time we had any conclusion to
>the battle, Marc will be talking M3000, and we'll all be cherishing those
>out of print E21 sourcebooks. :)

I still hold to the max size for a TL 9 ship being 9,999T. However never
being one to forgo a challange :*)

Battleship BB-D6168C2-480000-50603-0 MCr 5,546.612   4900T
batt bear              3     1 1 3                   Crew=62
batt                   3     1 1 3                   TL=9
Passengers=0 Low=0 Cargo=4 Fuel=1372 EP=392 Agility=6
Ships Troops=5

It would be interesting to play out a TCS campaign based on the FIW though,
wouldn't it :*).

[snip]

>>However more importantly, the Terrans are not fighting the central Vilani
>>fleet, they are fighting the provincial governors fleet. In the game Imperium
>>which simulates the the Interstellar Wars we find that the provincial
>>governor is prohibited from building any ship larger than a light cruiser. So
>>the Terrans are not facing the largest ships the  Vilani can build. The
>>question here is how big is a Vilani light cruiser? If we assumes that Vilani
>>capital ships are around 60,000T to 80,000T and their heavy cruisers around
>>40,000T to 50,000T, I'd hazzard a guess that Vilani light cruisers are in the
>>20,000T to 30,000T range. This makes the Terrans and Vilani a much closer
match
>>than pure TL analysis would indicate. At this size in HG the best weapons are
>>missile bays (fits with Vilani ships high missile factors in Imperium).

>Given the assessment and the problem of interpreting the rules, you do make
>a good point about the nature of the Imperium game.  However, the vastly
>restrictive ship sizes that both sides have, there is little point in trying
>to talk Capital ship, unless you accept it as an Ersha class, from my earlier
>post.

The term "Capital Ship" is entirely relative. If all you can build is 9,999T
ships (or 4,999T) then a 9,900T (or 4,900T) ship is a "Capital ship". In my
own campaigns, I use the term "Ship of the Line" for what most people call
Battleships and a lot of Cruisers. No prizes for guessing where I got that
idea :*).

>Then, given that the FIW was not too decisive, since the Vilani just have to
>keep coming back, they'll eventually capture all the Terran ships, repair
>the maneuver drives, and the only thing left for the Terrans to do is build
>more ships.  Hell, with Armor-11, the Vilani could start ramming the Terran
>ships--it just depends on how fast they build, or have accumulated the
>Ersha class.  They might be able to field 1:1 for Terran ships, and any
>Armor-11 ship would do, it wouldn't have to be the flagship. <G>

All the Terrans can do in the FIW is survive. I put their survival down to the
fact that even the Vilani provinical governor did not view them as much of a
threat during the war, coupled with unexpected Terran ships and tactics.

>>However, as a final proviso, all this is of course mute, as High Guard has
long
>>been retired as the "offical" ship design system (despite that fact, I do love
>>it and will continue to use it)

[snip]

>>/mode=humour
>>"QSDS, SSDS, FF&S2; piffle, in my day we used High Guard, crumpled fish'n'chip
>>paper and a burnt stick to write on it, you youn'uns just don't know when
>>you've got it good"

>:)

>Since J.P. is one of my players, and the flame of FF&S2 started,
>I stopped giving him digests on floppy.  But that didn't stop him from
>pointing out that QSDS, SSDS, and FF&S2 all need spreadsheets, and to be
>done "right", should all be done together.  I have a feeling, if I break
>it to my players that we're leaving HG behind, I'm gonna be in trouble. :(

I still use HG as well. I like it, it might be a bit "crude", but I'm willing to
accept that. It works well enough to allow me to concentrate on roleplaying and
I can fudge around the simplifications. I suspect that I'm not the only referee
who started with CT and has kept HG as their design system.

  Andrew etc.
    a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz

****************************************************************************
The longest distance between two points is with children.
****************************************************************************

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 12:42:11 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: RoM/Terran TL

David Smart wrote:

>Andrew Boulton wrote:
>>
>> Bruce,
>>
>> > (Does anyone with access to Supplement 10 remember if there were any TL-15
>> > worlds on the Solomani side of the border even in 1107?)
>>
>> Don't have it handy, but I'm 99% sure no.
>
>Actually there are. Scandia Subsector (home to the Cymbeline system) has
>4.

Erm. Wrong methinks.

Supplement 10 describes the *Arcturus* Subsector (home to the Cymbeline
system). This does have 4 TL15 worlds, but *all* the worlds in the
subsector are in the *Third Imperium*, not the Solomani Confederation. The
thick black line at the bottom is the border <g>. Not sure how they mark
that in space....

The S10 copy I have has no worlds >TL14.

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"Omnia Mutantur Nihil Interit"  -  Sandman 'The Wake'
"Everything Changes, but nothing is truly lost" 

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 12:20:47 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: Encouraging Rob....

Douglas Berry wrote:

>Let's drink to excess!
>
>To EXCESS!!!!  *clink*

If this is scout beer, shouldn't it be

To EXCESS!!!!

And BEYOND!!!!

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"Omnia Mutantur Nihil Interit"  -  Sandman 'The Wake'
"Everything Changes, but nothing is truly lost" 

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 08:40:01 -0400
From: "Paul D. Owensby" <pauld@athens.net>
Subject: Re: Early Charges?

>We don't *enjoy* IG-bashing. We'd all be much happier praising them rather 
>than burying them, but when one product (CotI) is a year late, most are full 
>of errors, and some are so bad it's embarrassing (like Starships), what else 
>can we do? We want IG to succeed, but we also want products that are
properly 
>proof-read and playtested, and come out on time (in that order).

I think most of us would be happy with just the first two. Not meant as a
bash,
just an observation as to why some of us get a bit upset.

**********************************************************
Paul Darius Owensby (pauld@athens.net)                   
ValuJump Lines:"So Economical, You'll Think You're Part of the Crew" (tm)
Pan-Imperia: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/Paul_Owensby/
Home of ValuJump Lines, Pan-Imperia Shipyards, and Beginnings for DOS.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 08:18:33 -0400
From: "Paul D. Owensby" <pauld@athens.net>
Subject: Re: "Duplicate" skills

>One point no-one's mentioned yet is about skill equivalences.
>
>I really hate it when I roll a character (CT) with Liason-3, Admin-2, 
>Streetwise-1.  Since the Liason counts as Admin or Streetwise-2, 
>these skills are "wasted".  Similarly with the Pilot-4, Ship's Boat-2 
>character... a kind GM (ha!) would allow rerolls, anyone got a spare 
>kind referee? 8-)

This is also a problem I have w/ respect to Skill Cascades. IIRC, using
gun combat for an example, if you get Shotgun-4 (Jed Clampett) you have
the equivalent of Pistol-3, Rifle-3, and SMG-3. Then, if you get SMG
skill as a pick, it suddenly drops you to SMG-1. The same effect exists
for all the other Cascades as well. Where then is the incentive to ever
choose a level of skill in any of the other branches of the Cascade? This
is something I'd like to see fixed in T4.1 .

**********************************************************
Paul Darius Owensby (pauld@athens.net)                   
ValuJump Lines:"So Economical, You'll Think You're Part of the Crew" (tm)
Pan-Imperia: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/Paul_Owensby/
Home of ValuJump Lines, Pan-Imperia Shipyards, and Beginnings for DOS.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 08:30:51 -0400
From: "Paul D. Owensby" <pauld@athens.net>
Subject: Re: Phil and Dixie

>	Yup, I remember that one.  One of my fave cartoons ever done in a
>TSR publications was one of those color strips in the back of Dragon
>magazine, where they were expounding on the differences between fantasy and
>SF rpgs, like where weapons come from ("Forged 10,000 years ago on the
>battleground of Z'Blnith, this wand..."/"This blaster?  Sears.  23.95 on
>sale.") and so forth.  Anyone remember it?

Phil and Dixie! I did so love that strip... My favorite from that
particular one
is the last panel: (paraphrased from a very old memory) 

"The one place where fantasy and sci-fi genres overlap however, is in the 
gatherings in the local tavern at the end of the day: (Big hairy barbarian and
space ranger type sitting on adjacent stools having an argument)

SR: "They're mutants!"
BHB: "They're trolls!"
SR: "Mutants!"
BHB: "Trolls!"
SR: "...They're Mutant Trolls!"
BHB: "I'll buy that..."
Bartender: "You idiots are looking in the mirror again!"

My CarWars group has been the Mutant Trolls ever since :)

**********************************************************
Paul Darius Owensby (pauld@athens.net)                   
ValuJump Lines:"So Economical, You'll Think You're Part of the Crew" (tm)
Pan-Imperia: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/Paul_Owensby/
Home of ValuJump Lines, Pan-Imperia Shipyards, and Beginnings for DOS.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 08:24:20 -0400
From: "Paul D. Owensby" <pauld@athens.net>
Subject: Re: History skill

>This comes up because I just read a hilarious, highly educational book
>called "Beer Blast: The Inside Story of the Brewing Industry's Battles for
>Your Money" by Philip Van Munching (ex of Van Munching & Co, importers of
>Heineken beer) It is a wickedly funny tale of the Beer industry's
>marketing battles, mostly from the 70's to today, told by a veteran of the
>marketing trenches. ISBN # 0-8129-6391-1 Times Books, 1997
>
>It has LOTS of examples of failed 'psychohistory' (aka marketing). 

Got to check that one out. Your discussion makes me think about something 
I heard on the radio the other day about how McD's is having to cut the price
of the "Arch" line of sandwiches to try and boost sales. Made me wonder who
the advertising *genius* was who came up with the entire Arch campaign:

"Let's see, we need a hook here... How about a hamburger that tastes so
'icky' that kids won't eat it? Yeah, that ought to sell billions!"

I think McD's has definitely knocked Burger King's "Herb" promotion out
of 1st place for stupidity with this one :)

**********************************************************
Paul Darius Owensby (pauld@athens.net)                   
ValuJump Lines:"So Economical, You'll Think You're Part of the Crew" (tm)
Pan-Imperia: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/Paul_Owensby/
Home of ValuJump Lines, Pan-Imperia Shipyards, and Beginnings for DOS.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 08:37:59 -0400
From: "Paul D. Owensby" <pauld@athens.net>
Subject: Re: Zero-G Nappy Time 

>The problem with using CG is that CG provides a force pushing up, it
>doesn't neutralize gravity. Thus, the resulting bed wouldn't be "zero
>G", it'd be like a waterbed or like the skydiving trainer that uses the
>highspeed fan to support you in mid-air. Your weight would be
>"balanced" by an upward force, rather than cancelled. The feeling is
>going to be different.

I'm using CG because it's what CSC has, and I don't have FFS2 yet :) I'm
thinking maybe a variety of CG projectors arranged in a globe like shape
that produces a CG "field" rather than a flat bed area projecting up. It is
my impression that CG doesn't actually push against gravity but just 
neutralizes it, while ignoring the inertia effects that would cause such a
craft (or bed occupant) to be hurled off the planet.

>I'd like to see a "thrustless drive". :-) 
>(Perhap you meant reactionless?)

Doh! Yeah that's what I meant to type... Of course, if you'd like to see a
thrustless drive system, drop by and I'll show you my old Mustang out in
the parking lot...hasn't been out of that space in over a year now :)

**********************************************************
Paul Darius Owensby (pauld@athens.net)                   
ValuJump Lines:"So Economical, You'll Think You're Part of the Crew" (tm)
Pan-Imperia: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/Paul_Owensby/
Home of ValuJump Lines, Pan-Imperia Shipyards, and Beginnings for DOS.

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1740
***********************************
Traveller-digest      Sunday, August 24 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1741



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Skill levels and stats
Little black books (was RE: Binders and other Trivia)
Re: 3d Blowthrough Rule
Re: Little black books (was RE: Binders and other Trivia)
Re: Starship gravity control
Re: History skill
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1738 
Solomani TL15 Worlds
"Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations
More bad URLs
Re: 3d Blowthrough Rule
Waterknife skill
Re: Skill levels and stats
Re: Updated CSC
Re: Updated CSC
Re: 3d Blowthrough Rule
Re: Brokers
RE: Max skill level
Re: Skill levels
Re: Mee-too, dee-too, and wounds (was RE: Task Resolution)
Re: Task Resolution
Re: T4.1 Task System Debate Redux
Re: Starship gravity control
Re: 3d Blowthrough Rule
Re: Task Resolution

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 08:08:50 -0500
From: Andy Holzrichter <jhereg@southwind.net>
Subject: Skill levels and stats

There has been a lot of talk about how to make skill levels and stats work
as a consistant whole.  Has anyone considered limiting the amount of stat
that can be applied to a skill?  My first thought was 3* or 2* the skill
level.  This would have the problem of keeping a character from being a
natural at something, but would allow them to peak much higher than the
person with a low stat.
									
												Andy Holzrichter

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 08:41:11 -0500
From: David Reed <david@techrefuge.com>
Subject: Little black books (was RE: Binders and other Trivia)

On Saturday, August 23, 1997 7:51 PM, scharlto@ifsna.com wrote:
[snip]
> Issue 3 (Lack of Consumer Appeal) is a VERY LEGITIMATE issue.  A little
> history here.  There have been many games released in the binder format.
> Most have been small-quantity printings, with very low quality artwork and [snip]
> the binder) that most copies fell apart after only a few uses.  My FLGS had
> many returns on this product due to this problem, and eventually TSR moved
> back into the normal hardcover format.

My biggest complaint with *ANY* binder.  I should really buy stock in those 
little round reinforcement thingies.

> All this rambling does have a point - I am not sure a binder approach is
> applicable to the basic rules for T4.1, mostly because of the lack of
> consumer appeal.  However, there are other T4 things that really SCREAM for
> this approach.  Specifically; equipment books (weapons, vehicles,
> starships), Technical Architecture books (FF&S, other future add-ons) and
> First Survey type books.  All of these share the same element of being
> constantly added to, updated, revised or annotated (either by the owner or
> by Imperium Games).  The basic rules are self-contained as a basic ruleset;
> future expansions and additions are not the basic rules, but are
> supplements or advanced rulesets.

I have to agree completely with Steve here.  I would have loved to have seen 
Starships, Aliens 1, and FFS2 in this 'binder' format (not sure about 
Milieu:0).  However, Steve's on target about the main rulebook as well.  I want 
a hardback, and I'm willing to pay for it.  I think that people "buy into" 
certain RPGs, and different crowds are attracted by hardcover/price point. 
 Owning the hardcover editions of certain RPGs was always more of a status 
symbol as well.  I wish that more companies would at make small runs of 
hardcovers (I never play MERP, but I bought the anniversary hardcover, same 
with Vampire et al, good 'idear' books, bad genre).  </ramble>

The only reason I would excuse a basic ruleset for being in a binder was a 
tremendous amount of errata.  :-(  Or frequent editions/revisions.  I sure wish 
the old Rolemaster was in binder format.  ;-)  The new ones are drilled, but to 
damn big to fit in a normal binder.

Since we will never see "the little black books" again, I vote for everything 
in hardcover.
_________________________________________________________________

David Reed            "We have a saying: 'If you're not confused,
                         then you don't know what's going on...'"
david@techrefuge.com            -Frankie McGuire from Devil's Own

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 07:44:50 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: 3d Blowthrough Rule

At 02:59 AM 8/24/97 +0000, you wrote:
>Douglas E. Berry wrote:
>
>> I'm just at that point in TACS, and right now I'm leaning towards having
>> work like this:
>
>> Comments?  
>
>I've been away for a while.  What is TACS?

The Tactical Action Combat System that I'm writing.  It's a task driven,
Action Point combat framework for T41.

Should be on the list sometime later tonight.
- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 07:49:30 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Little black books (was RE: Binders and other Trivia)

<Lots of snipping>

The first thing I did with FFS2 was take it down to Kinko's and have the
binding cut off.  Then I put everything into page protectors and shoved the
whole shebang into a binder.

With a book that that, the binder format makes a great deal of sense, since
it needs to lie flat and put up with a great deal of page flipping.  It
also helps protect the pages from coke spills, and I can take the tables I
need out of the back and have them for easy reference.
- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 08:02:41 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Starship gravity control

At 08:42 PM 8/23/97 -0500, Eris wrote:

>I have the cabin's controls require them to key in a password input (with
>Command Crew having Master Overrides) before you can adjust anything other
>than light. The password  is used to lock and unlock the door as well. It
>is set to the cabin number originally, and the passenger can change it to
>anything they would like.

I've always held that the ship's internal field is slowly adjusted to the
gravity at the destination world over the course of the trip.  This allows
the passengers and crew to acclimate to the new conditions before arrival.
- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 08:00:10 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: History skill

At 08:24 AM 8/24/97 -0400, you wrote:

>Got to check that one out. Your discussion makes me think about something 
>I heard on the radio the other day about how McD's is having to cut the price
>of the "Arch" line of sandwiches to try and boost sales. Made me wonder who
>the advertising *genius* was who came up with the entire Arch campaign:
>
>"Let's see, we need a hook here... How about a hamburger that tastes so
>'icky' that kids won't eat it? Yeah, that ought to sell billions!"
>
>I think McD's has definitely knocked Burger King's "Herb" promotion out
>of 1st place for stupidity with this one :)

On the other hand, McD's has a wildly sucessful ad campaign here in the SF
Bay area for the "McDouble" burger.  A character named Eddie the Echo who
says everything twice, until he eats the burger.  Simple, cheap, and funny
as hell..

what this has to do with Traveller escapes me completely.
- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 11:48:50 -0400 (EDT)
From: Keebler863@aol.com
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1738 

How do I unsuscribe again?????

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 11:18:33 -0700
From: David Smart <dsmart@flash.net>
Subject: Solomani TL15 Worlds

Harold Hale wrote:
>
> >Actually there are. Scandia Subsector (home to the Cymbeline system) has
> >4.
> 
>    Better recheck your map.  All the worlds in that subsector are
> **Imperial** property in 1107.

SD Mooney added:

> >Actually there are. Scandia Subsector (home to the Cymbeline system) has
> >4.
> 
> Erm. Wrong methinks.
> 
> Supplement 10 describes the *Arcturus* Subsector (home to the Cymbeline
> system). This does have 4 TL15 worlds, but *all* the worlds in the
> subsector are in the *Third Imperium*, not the Solomani Confederation. The
> thick black line at the bottom is the border <g>. Not sure how they mark
> that in space....
> 
> The S10 copy I have has no worlds >TL14.

Well, we'll just see about this! (flip, flip, flip) Let's
see now...
Oh...er...uh...I was, uh, tired and, um, had just finished
a 6-pack of Scout brew...

To convince TMLrs of last post's validity
Formidable, Persuasion skill (fateful)

('rattlerattletoss' "boxcars, dang it")

It was the Scout brew! Yeah, that's it! It was the Scout
brew! Yeah! Yeah, that's the ticket!

(mea culpa, mea culpa)

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 12:19:18 -0400 (EDT)
From: SemoFetus@aol.com
Subject: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations

In a campaign I am working on (hybrid Trav) I have an interesting dilemna.
I have two subsectors mapped out (I am playing in the standard CT world,
Imperium c. 1100), and in these two subsectors I have two VERY long
mains (jump one trade routes).  One wraps around one subsector and
through the other and back into the first, and the other goes more or less
straight across both subsectors width-wise.

Now, when I connected the two subsectors together and saw the two
huge mains, visions of Free Trader unions danced in my head,
massive subsector wide lines as well.  I loved it.  One problem is,
though, that on one of the mains, there is a very low tech world lacking
both starport and gas giant.  ie.  dead end.

In trying to figure out a way around this, I thought about a calibration
point much like the ones from the TNE Regency sourcebook.  When
I looked for a location, this seemed too perfect because the logical
place for the calibration point would connect both of the mains,
thus roughly doubling the amount of worlds that can be reached by
a J-1 trader...

My dilemna is:  Is there a source for rough prices of starports?  I
think I saw some discussion a little while back.  In addition, the
other dilemna is, since I am using FF&S2 manuever drives, would
they work?  The Comet or Iceteroid wouldn't be huge like a star or
anything.  I hope that manuever drives DON'T work here, because 
I've just gotten visions of HEPlaR tug boats pulling ships out to 100 
diameters of the comet.

Semo

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 13:08:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: Larry Hadley <lhadley@peterboro.net>
Subject: More bad URLs

It seems that Peter Berghold and Mick Bailey have also dropped off the
net. Anybody that has valid URLs to these two may send me private email so
I can correct the listing.

(www.cnct.com/home/peterb/ 

and 

www.thehub.com.au/~mickb/ 

respectively)

2300AD fans might notice that Jay Adan has been absent for some time...any
pointers to any address changes for him also appreciated.

- -- DLH                                 lhadley@peterboro.net

http://text.peterboro.net/~lhadley/Profile.html

  "Fight to fly, fly to fight, fight to win." - TOPGUN motto.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 17:44:52 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: 3d Blowthrough Rule

> The Tactical Action Combat System that I'm writing.  It's a task driven,
> Action Point combat framework for T41.
> 
> Should be on the list sometime later tonight.

I'm looking forward to seeing it.  I'm acutally using Snapshot in my 
game tonight.

Kenneth.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 10:42:56 -0800
From: Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca>
Subject: Waterknife skill

What skill are people using for waterknives in combat? I was using Battle
Dress, since they are an integral part of BD in my campaign. But after my
players saw them in use by some Imperial marines, they are trying to modify
an industrial waterknife for use on board ship. The description in
Emperor's Arsenal calls them "melee weapons", so should I use Melee combat?
Few of my players have Melee combat skill. On the other hand, maybe this is
a Good Thing; the combination of low skill and Contact range may convince
the players these things should only be used by trained professionals. And
wait 'till they see what happens on a spectacular failure... Muwaahaahaa!

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 17:44:51 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: Skill levels and stats

> There has been a lot of talk about how to make skill levels and stats work
> as a consistant whole.  Has anyone considered limiting the amount of stat
> that can be applied to a skill?  My first thought was 3* or 2* the skill
> level. 


Why would you want to do that--just for game mechanics?  Why would 
you want to deny a character the benefit of a high stat because his 
skill is low?

My thinking is high natural ability should help the chances of a 
novice--not have his natural ability stunted due to his incompetence.

Kenneth.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 10:25:54 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Updated CSC

At 12:07 AM 8/24/97 GMT, you wrote:
>I've just uploaded a new version of CSC (was v1.0.1b, is now v1.0.2b).  

and this would be found at...?

Doug Berry
dberry@hooked.net
message to short for the .sig

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 12:46:19 -0500
From: Sam Thomas <sinbad@dfw.net>
Subject: Re: Updated CSC

At 11:19 PM 8/23/97 -0400, Roderick Darroch Elliott wrote:
<snip>
>>Oh yes, and I've added a few weapons from EA as well.  Question: were these
>>designed using the FFS2 system, or Greg Porter's own method?  If the latter,
>>can they be converted back into real-world units?

Converted back into real world units? Greg's system does not need to
converted into real world units. 

>	They were probably done using Greg's system, since FF&S2 only got
>written after EA was released.  Apparently 3G3 (Greg's system) was superior
>to FF&S1 in many respects, and from what I can tell, so is FF&S2, so
>quality/consistency ought not tobe that big of a problem.

They were definitely designed using Greg's 3G3 system, and by the way he
has new version of his 3G3 spreadsheet available now version 1.1, not its
not free.

- -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
(c)1997 Sam Thomas  |Email:sinbad@dfw.net|
Sinbad Sam, Owner and Operator of Sinbad Sam's Saloon 
Chief Weapons Designer For Reddkneck Arms and Munitions
- -----------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 10:24:39 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: 3d Blowthrough Rule

At 10:03 PM 8/23/97 -0500, you wrote:
>On 08/23/97 at 06:43 PM,  "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net> said:
>
>>I'm just at that point in TACS, and right now I'm leaning towards having
>>work like this:
>
>>1-25kg    1D6
>>26-50kg   2D6
>>51-100kg  3D6
>>101-200kg 4D6
>>etc..
>
>>This puts the majority of humans in the 3D6 range.
>
>And most Vargr at 2d6, Aslan at 4d6, etc. I like it, and the breaks look OK
>to me.

That's what I'll use then.  It does require that you know how much your
charater masses, though..

>>As for what is affected by blowthrough; bullets, lasers, and fragments are
>>subject to the blowthrough rule, while explosions and plasma/fusion
>>weapons are not.

>I'm of mixed mind on lasers.  In 3G3, Greg Porter, discribes the effect of
>a laser on flesh more like a steam explosion than a puncture like a high
>velocity bullet.  It *might* be that lasers deposit more of their energy in
>watery flesh than they would burning/punching through metal.

In the intersts of keeping things as simple as possible, I'm keeping the
common forms of damage subject to the blowthrough rule.  I may go back and
do advanced rules later covering the various odd and strange things you cna
do to the human body.  

>Heavy low velocity projectiles probably shouldn't "blowthrough" either.
>They may not have the energy to punch all the way through, but because of
>their size do massive damage inside a body.

Like TL3-4 balls?  In most cases like that, the sheer size of the round
prevents the damage from getting too high without making the weapon a
massive support gun, and then the damage will blow through from velocity.

>I'm no expert, though, just something to think about.

I'm designing this for non-experts to use, so your input is appreciated.
- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 97 19:01 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: Brokers

In-Reply-To: <970822002708_957866763@emout10.mail.aol.com>

> The characteristics versus skill debate could range on forever. T41
> is going
> to have characteristics and skills.

I don't think anybody thinks characteristics *shouldn't* be involved, 
it's just that most seem to think the full value is too much.
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 97 19:01 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: RE: Max skill level

In-Reply-To: <199708220604.CAA27458@Hydro.CAM.ORG>

Glenn,

> That applied to maximum total number of skill levels per character. I was
> asking whether there was a limit to how many levels you can have in a given
> skill.
>  
> I think 15 is a sensible limit, since stats are also capped at 15.

How about the value of the controlling stat, so an average PC has a max skill 
of 7?
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 97 19:01 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: Skill levels

In-Reply-To: <199708230033.UAA24055@Mithril.MPGN.COM>

Eris,

> Although, this is a good solution for our naturally talented character it
> leaves characters of average and low talent in trouble.  Bob's INT is 7.  A
> skill 1 gives him Aver-72%, Diff-26%, Form-5%, Stag-1%, Impos-0%, and even
> a skill 4 only boosts him to Aver-97%, Diff-63%, Form-24%, Stag-6%,
> Impos-1%.

Those look perfectly reasonable to me. For Joe Average, Impossible tasks 
*should* be impossible.
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 97 19:01 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: Mee-too, dee-too, and wounds (was RE: Task Resolution)

In-Reply-To: <01BCAE87.130F0260.david@techrefuge.com>

David,

> Or every time you're shot, splashed by a psion, or dropped on your head.  Okay, 
> that tears it: my ONE big beef with Traveller, CT/MT, is the deduction of 
> wounds from stats.  Arrrgh!  Sorry, I just *hate* that.  How 'bout life levels 
> or somethin'...  Sorry, I meant to not propose a lame fix.

Actually, I consider that to be possibly the most elegant way of dealing with 
wounds that I've seen. It combines the simplicity of 'hit points' with the realism 
of having injuries significantly affecting the character.
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 97 19:00 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

In-Reply-To: <33FF24E1.608D@brokersys.com>

Kenneth,

> > My vote would be to lose the D3 and use (stat/2)+skill. This would reduce the
> > dominance of stats over skills, and in the process make tasks harder.
>  
>  
> The problem with using a method of dividing stats is that stats change
> in combat.  When your character gets wounded, you have to recalculate
> again.
>  
> That's why I went with multiplying the skill (instead of dividing the
> stat) in KBv2.0.  Skills never change during combat.  You've already
> made the calculation and written it in its own column right next to the
> skill.

Yes, I agree, your method is easier. However, I don't consider dividing a small 
integer by 2 to be a particularly difficult mathematical challenge (and if you're 
using a D6/2 as a D3, then T4 forces you to do it anyway). 

I'm sure KBv2.0 is a much more accurate and flexible system (well, you keep 
telling us it is :-), but it just doesn't 'feel' right to me.
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 01:41:31 +0000 ()
From: kraehe@bakunin.hb.north.de (Michael Koehne)
Subject: Re: T4.1 Task System Debate Redux

Moin Michael Koehne,

	Sorry for the repost but there where several typos :-(

> 	Basics : Characteristic are 2d6 (2-12) while skills are (0-6)
> 
> 	Taskresoltion : Characteristic >= (n-skill)d6
> 
> 	Easy      : 3d6
> 	Average   : 4d6
> 	Difficult : 5d6
> 	Formidable: 6d6
> 	Imposible : 7d6

	So an easy task is hard for unskilled.
	A beginner (skill of 1-2) should only attempt easy and average tasks.
	A professionell (skill 3-4) dosnt worry about routine task.
	Experts (5-6) will only have fun with the hard stuff.

	BTW: We should better close task resoluton debate. Perhaps T4.1
	should have a task chapter describing several canon ways to resolve
	task and only mention the E.A.D.F.I. words.

- -- 
	kraehe@bakunin.north.de		human.is-bremen.de/~kraehe/traveller
		  " ceterum censeo MSDOS esse delendam "

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 19:23:51 +0100
From: Simon Early <sre@taz.compulink.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Starship gravity control

  
> I hope you make it a little harder to fiddle with than that!  If I just let
> it be a dial by the door, then somebody would reach in and give it quick
> twist one way then the other.  Ha! Ha! Good joke, huh? ;->

In all but the lowest TL ships the "envirnment controls" are voice activated.  
You need to teach the computer your voice (either by speaking, or with a 
standard set of data stored on your ID card) when you move into a cabin.

Pranksters, and the Enterprise crew, will still find a way to change the wall 
grav so that you get thrown from side to side at the strangest times ;-)

Simon

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 18:25:23 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: 3d Blowthrough Rule

On Sat, 23 Aug 1997 18:43:48 -0700, Douglas E. Berry wrote:

> At 01:14 PM 8/23/97 -0500, you wrote:
> 
> >>> No, don't kill it, include a few more exceptions to the rule
> >>> (explosive ammo, energy weapons, etc).  Either that or eliminate it as
> >>> a general rule and have it apply to only those methods of attack for
> >>> which it makes more sense (300 m/s and greater projectile weapons).
> >
> >>I agree with James here.  Originally, I didn't like the rule--but  that
> >>was because I did not understand it.
> >
> >I understand the reasoning behind the blowthrough rule too, but why 3d? 
> >Why not 4d?  
> >
> >Why not a different number of dice based on the bulk of the target?
> >Something like: for human sized targets, 4d; for smaller targets 2d; for
> >larger targets 5d; for elephants and whales 6d; etc.
> 
> I'm just at that point in TACS, and right now I'm leaning towards having
> work like this:
> 
> 1-25kg    1D6
> 26-50kg   2D6
> 51-100kg  3D6
> 101-200kg 4D6
> etc..
> 
> This puts the majority of humans in the 3D6 range.
> 
> As for what is affected by blowthrough; bullets, lasers, and fragments are
> subject to the blowthrough rule, while explosions and plasma/fusion weapons
> are not.
> 
> Comments?  I know I said I'd have TACs out by tonight, but I want to make
> sure I've covered everything.

As I have come to understand, lasers *should not* be included with
such a rule.  I originally thought that a laser beam would burn a hole
through the target and continue out the other side (ie: a 5d damaging
beam would drop 3d max into the target and send 2d out the back and
down range).  From what I have learned on this list as to how lasers
interact with fleshy (ie: mostly water) targets is that the vapourized
tissue obscures the beam, absorbing the rest of the beam's energy.
Lasers also react explosively when they strike flesh as the beam super
heats the water, explosively turning it into steam.

No, the best candidates for the 3d max rule are traditional slug
throwers that do not rely on a warhead or "payload" to do its damage.
Some exceptions like weaponry with either slow (less than 100 m/s) or
hyper (4,000 m/s or more) might be included, but these would be rare
enough that such an exemptions to the 3d max rule could be included
with the weapon description and not in the combat rules themselves.
Or not... whatever :)

PCMPs are, in reality, high-tech slug throwers (plasma instead of
solid lead or steel).  Since their damage is inflicted upon the target
using multiple methods (impact, contact burns, and radiation/proximity
burns), putting a 3d max limit on the damage delivered via kinetic
energy is fine with me (all though some others on the list think that
that's too complicated).

And to answer Ken's question as to why 3d and not 4d... my guess it
has something to do with the fact that characters have three stats
that "absorb" damage and not four.  Although it isn't specifically
stated in the rules, the example regarding damage dice allocation
leads one to believe that the first die is randomly distributed
between three stats, with the second die being distributed between the
_two_ remaining stats, and the last die affecting the final stat (ass
opposed to the idea of distributing each die among three stats, even
if this means that it is possible for all three dice to affect the
same stat).  With a 3d max rule, all stats are reduced to some degree
while allowing the target the chance to stay conscious (something that
an additional die might not allow).

James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 97 13:11:18 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

On 08/24/97 at 02:57 AM,  Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com> said:

>> you just playing "dog in the manger?" ;->

>What is dog in the manager?

It's "dog in the manger", not manager. ;->  A manger is a hay or feed
trough. The expression "dog in the manger", as I understand it, comes from
the dog that would be hidden under the hay and jump out when the cattle
began to feed. This unsettled the cattle and generally caused trouble for
the farmer. So, it means to go along with a program, or idea, while
maintaining hidden objections or reservations. Then jumping up after the
decision is made, unsettling the organization and going off on your own. 
It also can be taken to mean, having a hidden agenda.  I asked if you were
playing that game..notice the smiley...to give you a chuckle, because I
*know* you would never do something like that.
  
Yes, I know you can always "just use KB2.0", but we aren't talking about
individual fixes we can all apply, we're talking about trying to convince
Marc to fix the rules that go into T4.1. If you *really* don't think
Characteristics that range from 2 to 12, while Skills range from 0 to 6,
with an Asset made up of flat Characteristic+Skill will work you should to
say so, and work with us toward a real solution. If your solution is simply
Marc adopting KB2, then say that, too.

On a different subject, I don't know why Marc posted the objections on the
list if he wasn't still open to making changes.  If it was just so he could
attempt to counter objections, and the matter is actually settled, then he
should have said that in the original post...it would have saved a lot of
bandwidth. ;->  OTOH, if he *is* open to making changes, then perhaps he
should be clearer about that too.  I'm preceiving mixed signals in his
posts, and I don't know whether to just stop trying to convince him that
changes are needed or continue. 


Eris,
    one thing you can't accuse me of is having a *hidden* agenda. ;-> -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1741
***********************************
Traveller-digest      Sunday, August 24 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1742



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: What I'd like to see--Task Resolution
Re: RoM/Terran TL
FF&S2 HELP!
Re: T41 Skills Draft
Re: Task Resolution
Re: 3d Blowthrough Rule
Re: M21 - Shipsizes
Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations
RE: Max skill level
Action Point Table for TACS
TACS, an intoduction
Task listing for TACS
Re: T4.1 Task System Debate Redux
CSC sail bug...

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 97 12:29:09 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: What I'd like to see--Task Resolution

On 08/24/97 at 03:04 AM,  Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com> said:

>Eris Reddoch wrote:

>> Ok, what constitutes a fix of "the problem of characteristics having too
>> much influence over skills", IYO?

>Simple.  T4.1 has to survive this test:

>Edu-7, Medical-4 character has a better chance of success than a Edu-11,
>Medical-1 character.

>When that happens, I'll consider the problem fixed.

LOL, that's what I thought you'd say.  Ken I'm afraid you are SOL. Marc, is
as unlikely to agree to multiplying skill levels by two as he is to
dropping the 1/2 at the difficult level.

You know, I think part of the problem is a misunderstanding of "learning
rates", and how Stats are applied in the game.  Some people seem to have to
idea that 1 year spent learning a skill results in the same gain for
everybody, and testing does not bare that out.  The current rules don't
bare that out either.  If the Stat is the character's natural aptitude for
a skill (which I don't really accept, but it seems most people do) then the
naturally talented (Stat-11) person *should* get more learning benefit out
of his first year (Skill-1) than a person of average talent (Stat-7).  The
current rules reflect this.  He should get more learning benefit from his
second through n'th year than the average stat person, too, up to a point
they cover this as well, but they break down much too fast, For example....

...using 3d6 tasks under current/proposed rules...

                           Skill Level
             0          1         2         3          4
   =======================================================          
 Stat 7   0.5% (3)   26% (8)   38% (9)   50% (10)   63% (11)
   % increase     25%       12%       12%        13%
 
 Stat 11   5% (5)    74% (12)  84% (13)  91% (14)   95% (15)
   % increase    69%        10%        7%        4%
 
Notice the big increase from 0 to 1, this is the built in bonus for first
acquiring the skill.  It is significantly higher for high Stat people (as
it should be IF the Stat is a learning modifier).  However, also notice
that because of the nature of bell curves the *rate* of increase from 1 to
4 is not only lower for a high Stat person, but increasingly so.  This is
because the average Stat person is still riding up the curve out to level
4, while the high Stat person is over the top as of level 1. 

While it is true that the benefit of training should have diminishing
returns, I don't this models either reality or (more importantly for the
game) our perception of reality.  Personally, I think that for any task
more difficult than Average *everybody* should have a learning curve (not
just a downward slope) where the first 2 or 3 levels bring increasing
benefits, before cresting and beginning to receive diminishing returns.

I've contended all along that we need to break natural talent (the Stat)
away from the aptitude for *learning* a specific skill (a multiplier for
improving that skill).  The Stat should form a base that contributes a
minimum level that the person starts from, and the *learned* skill should
contribute the rest.  Skills that the PC has a low aptitude for should
increase by a smaller amount (let's say 1 point per level) than skills for
which he has a high aptitude (let's say 2 points per level). Yes, you could
do this with the Characteristic, but it would be cleaner and more natural
to do it with either another set of Stats that represent the character's
sense/feel/learning rate for different skills. I've suggested this before,
and I'll present it again just to make sure everyone is aware of it, but I
not going to try to sell it.  It does add a little more rolling, and
arithmetic, to the game, so either you thing the advantages are worth it or
you don't.

I'm in the camp that says the learned skill should represent about as much
as the base stat IN A COMPETENT person.  I define a competent person as one
that will succeed at Routine tasks *virtually* 100% of the time.  (The
virtually is for Rob. ;-> Like him I do think everybody should have a
chance to flub-up and occasionally fail, but that's part of what
Exceptional Failure is all about.)  Using 2d6 as Routine, that means I
define Competency as an Asset (StatComponent + SkillComponent) of 12.  If
we agree that each part should be about half, then the average Stat should
contribute about 6 and the Professional level of skill should contribute
about 6.  

Notice, I didn't say Stat 6 and Skill 6, just that they should contribute
about that much.  I can really see only two ways of getting to 6 for
Professional Skill Levels, you either have the same scale 0-6 and multiply
by something (simplisticly 2), or you give out more skill levels (2/year
rather than 1.25/year seems to work pretty well).  Either way there are
still problems at the top and bottom end of the scales.

Given that we may have Stat 12+ in the game then we are saying that these
naturally talented people are Competent with 1 level of training. We are
also saying, given that Skill increases are a fixed amount (whether 1 *or*
2), so that a Stat 12 + Skill 1 person will have as good or better chance
of success at *any* level of difficulty than a Stat 7 + Skill 3 person.  We
are also saying that a Stat 12 person recieves *less* benefit from
increases in learning a related skill (after the first level) than the Stat
7 person out through Formidable Task difficulties (given Marc's scale).

Therefore, we are saying that an Average Professional is no better (or
worse) at Formidable tasks than a Highly Talented 1st year student. Some
people agree with that statement, so for them T4.1 *is* fixed. Your KB2
papers over the worst of the systems offenses (but not all, see above), and
for some people that's all they want.  Neither solution satisfies me.


Eris
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 20:18:16 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: RoM/Terran TL

In mail I wrote:

>The S10 copy I have has no worlds >TL14.

which of course should read "The S10 copy I have has no worlds >TL14 *in
the Solomani Confederation*. "

That will teach me to be smug....

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"Omnia Mutantur Nihil Interit"  -  Sandman 'The Wake'
"Everything Changes, but nothing is truly lost" 

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 15:31:33 -0400 (EDT)
From: SemoFetus@aol.com
Subject: FF&S2 HELP!

I just purchased FF&S2 the other day, I got to the store just as the UPS
truck delivered it :).  Anyhow, I'm MOSTLY satisfied with it.  I can overlook
the typographical errors, and once you get used to it, having all the tables
and equations in one place actually works.  However, there are some aspects
that are unclear that I need some help on.

*** 1.)  Table 212: Food Storage.  Does the volume include the amount of
food, or is it in addition to the amount of food?  For example:  If I have
2m3 of food at TL8, do I need an extra 2.4m3 for storage, or do I need 2.4m3
total for storage in which the food is fitted?  (2m3 for the food, plus 0.4m3
extra for the refrigiration, shelves, etc.).

*** 2.)  What is the volume of an individual workstation or crewstation?
 That is:  Is it the volume & mass of a seat + the mass of the workstation
from the table in the book, or what?  I know that there is errata for the
control system, but I mean JUST the volume for the workstations and
crewstations (how can I figure out how big a bridge I need if I don't have
the volume of the crew/workstations?).

*** 3.)  What constitutes an electronic system when figuring out how many
electronics crew members are needed?  Is it EACH component (i.e:  3xComputer,
Controls, Nav-Aids, Flight Avionics, NOE Avionics, 500,000 km Radio, 1000 AU
Laser Communicator, P13 Sensors, and A11 Sensors for a total of 12) or is it
some
other way (groups of components)?  If so, what are the groups of components?

Any help would be GREATLY appreciated, thanks.

Semo (the Confuseded)

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 14:46:54 -0500
From: Alex Ingram <ingram@airmail.net>
Subject: Re: T41 Skills Draft

Richard Hough wrote:
> 
> >BTW, I'm not gonna push for it's inclusion, but Scrounging is an important
> >skill that isn't listed. It's not really Admin, nor Trade or Broker (the
> >way they are defined), but characters are *always* Scrounging around for
> >something or other.  ;->
> 
> You got Scrounging too, eh? Yeah, it's one of the more useful skills in my
> campaign, up there with JoAT. Here's my definition:
> 
>         Scrounging      Int, Soc
> 
>   The character is skilled in finding items such as spare parts, tools,
> weapons, etc. Scrounging involves more than just randomly searching, and
> does not necessarily mean stealing items or doing anything illegal. The
> character may be able to call in favors or be able to assemble a working
> item from discarded junk. An individual with this skill is familiar with
> the kinds of places to search for a particular item and the people likely
> to have it. In the case of a previously contacted inhabited world, the
> individual will have knowledge of the proper inhabitants to contact
> regarding the availability of items, local laws governing their sale and
> possession, and be aware of specific areas on the planet where goods are
> most likely to be found.
> 
> Scrounging is in the Charisma skill cluster.
> 
> --
> Richard Hough
> rdhough@orca.bc.ca


Richard,

I posted the "Scrounging" description to get a more encompassing tasks
for the skill. I agree with you as to the general role of scrounging but
a skill should have specific task rolls. If you can think of such please
advise me. Thanks!

Alex Ingram

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 15:20:57 -0500
From: Alex Ingram <ingram@airmail.net>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

Andrew Boulton wrote:
> 
> In-Reply-To: <33FF24E1.608D@brokersys.com>
> 
> Kenneth,
> 
> > > My vote would be to lose the D3 and use (stat/2)+skill. This would reduce the
> > > dominance of stats over skills, and in the process make tasks harder.
> >
> >
> > The problem with using a method of dividing stats is that stats change
> > in combat.  When your character gets wounded, you have to recalculate
> > again.
> >
> > That's why I went with multiplying the skill (instead of dividing the
> > stat) in KBv2.0.  Skills never change during combat.  You've already
> > made the calculation and written it in its own column right next to the
> > skill.
> 
> Yes, I agree, your method is easier. However, I don't consider dividing a small
> integer by 2 to be a particularly difficult mathematical challenge (and if you're
> using a D6/2 as a D3, then T4 forces you to do it anyway).
> 
> I'm sure KBv2.0 is a much more accurate and flexible system (well, you keep
> telling us it is :-), but it just doesn't 'feel' right to me.
> ______________________________________________________________________
> Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
>  "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

Please excuse my ignorance but what is the KBv2.0 system any way?

Alex Ingram

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 16:20:39 -0500
From: Sam Thomas <sinbad@dfw.net>
Subject: Re: 3d Blowthrough Rule

At 10:24 AM 8/24/97 -0700, you wrote:
>At 10:03 PM 8/23/97 -0500, you wrote:
>>On 08/23/97 at 06:43 PM,  "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net> said:
>>
>>>I'm just at that point in TACS, and right now I'm leaning towards having
>>>work like this:
>>
>>>1-25kg    1D6
>>>26-50kg   2D6
>>>51-100kg  3D6
>>>101-200kg 4D6
>>>etc..
>>
>>>This puts the majority of humans in the 3D6 range.
>>
>>And most Vargr at 2d6, Aslan at 4d6, etc. I like it, and the breaks look OK
>>to me.

Hmmm according to my copy of V&V the vargr males mass 60kg and the females
55kg, so by the chart above they sould be 3D6.


- -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
(c)1997 Sam Thomas  |Email:sinbad@dfw.net|
Sinbad Sam, Owner and Operator of Sinbad Sam's Saloon 
Chief Weapons Designer For Reddkneck Arms and Munitions
- -----------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 21:53:17 +0000 ()
From: kraehe@bakunin.hb.north.de (Michael Koehne)
Subject: Re: M21 - Shipsizes

Moin Leroy William Lu Guatney,

> In my coverless edition, it says (excerpted, and re-formated on purpose):

	many thanks, just stored it ;-)

> Just for clarity, _the_ maximum size for a TL9 ship, Terran or not, is
> 4,999 tons.  With my own house rule, I drop that to 4,900 tons but that
> either value still does not allow for Terrans to mount Spinal mounts.

	Spinal mounts are not limited to > 5000dt, if you are using
	FFS for design. EG: My Gus600 Liner has four 25Mj meson
	accellerators. They are 60 meters long, needle thin, have a
	weight of only 46 metric tons and release 25 points of damage
	in close combats.

	Ok they are Tl13, but just an other design for a tl9/4999er.

	This ship could mount 120 meter spinal mount weapons. Using
	a 400 Mj PA with a bore of 5.7m, will produce 10:100-80-40-20,
	( or 10:3-3-2-1 BR, 4-4-3-2 T4 ) for only 230 displacement tons.
	4 of them plus a large fighter bay, and some missile bays will
	show a capable warship.

> The max ship size for TL11, Vilani or otherwise is 74,999 (my house rule is
> 74,900).

	Its usual to call ship classes *999er because of burocratical
	contrains. German Captains Licence include distinct limits
	for coast, Atlantic and Pacific. These terms are stated e.g.
	" less than 5000 tons Pacific " so we have the class of 4999ers.

- -- 
	kraehe@bakunin.north.de		human.is-bremen.de/~kraehe/traveller
		  " ceterum censeo MSDOS esse delendam "

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 22:05:53 +0000
From: Garry Ward <Garry.E.Ward@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations

At 04:19 PM 8/24/97 +0000, Semo wrote:
><snip>
>Now, when I connected the two subsectors together and saw the two
>huge mains, visions of Free Trader unions danced in my head,
>massive subsector wide lines as well.  I loved it.  One problem is,
>though, that on one of the mains, there is a very low tech world lacking
>both starport and gas giant.  ie.  dead end.
>
><snip>
>
>Semo
>

Why a dead end? Develop it. One or more of your trade organizations has
people on planet trying to obtain rights to develop a port there. Develop
the port without the locals input; select an isolated area near a body of
water and have a trade organization, a consortium of organizations, or even
a aggressive individual initiate a port & refueling operation. 

Does your view of the Imperium have an organization that 'protects'
undeveloped worlds? If not, then the economic engine will drive over the low
tech world with what ever is needed to provide a low cost path over which
trade will flow. 

If you are still at the design stage of your universe; simply add the Gas
Giant. If you rolled the subsectors randomly, you have the right to adjust
the rolls to fit your planned story line or lines, add the gas giant where
you want. 

You, as Referee, are god, not the dice. 

Garry


 

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 97 16:55:55 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: RE: Max skill level

On 08/24/97 at 07:01 PM,  aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
said:

>>  
>> I think 15 is a sensible limit, since stats are also capped at 15.

>How about the value of the controlling stat, so an average PC has a max
>skill  of 7?

And a controlling stat of 2 causes all skills that use it to max out at 2?
I've got a problem with that. ;-> If we can boost the low end a little it
might work, though.

What we need to to narrow the range of STATS from 2 to 12(15). I like
something like 4 to 10, with 10 being the *absolute* max for humans. Skills
could be maxed out at the Stat now and the worst maxed out skill would be 8
(72% Aver, 26% Diff, 5% Form, 1% Stag, 0% Imp). I could accept that as the
best a Terrrible character could do. 

Awarding 4 Background and 8 skills per term (rather than 4+1) probably
would be enough to boost skills up to approximately the same level as
Stats.  Six term characters getting 8 per term would have 52 levels divided
among skills and the purely average character would have 42 points divided
among Stats, but the 52 points would be spread across 10 to 15 skills. 

I randomly rolled up some characters(random table/random choice) using
8skills/term, maxed at a controlling number (I used 4 to 8, but 4 to 10
should work OK) and I ended up with pretty good characters. They all had
above 20 skills, many 1 and 2's, fewer 3-4, a few 5-6, and only
occasionally 7's and 8's.  I'm going to do some more using pick table/roll
tonight, and see how it looks.

BTW, I've been using 6 new *aptitude* Stats: Aggressiveness-controls all
combat/physical skills, Esthetics-controls all art/language skills,
Scholarship-controls all skills gained through classroom-type study,
Charisma-controls interpersonal/social skills, Natural Sense(green
thumb)-controls survival/outdoorsy/bio-based skills, and Tech
Sense-controls all technological/scientific skills because I didn't want to
use the Characteristics that already contribute the base of the Target
Number. If you don't want to use my 6 aptitudes, you could just use the
Characteristics though.  

For testing purposes tonight, I'll use the Characteristics only.

Eris

- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 16:47:11 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Action Point Table for TACS

Consolidated Action Point Costs.
* requires a task to complete sucessfully

Movement:                             Combat:

Move 1 meter           2AP            Fire a weapon (aimed)        4AP*
Move backwards 1 meter 4AP            Fire a weapon (quick)        2AP*
Crawl 1 meter          4AP            Reload w/clip                8AP
Stairs up (1 flight)   +4AP           Reload w/loose ammo          4AP/round
Stairs down (1 flight) +3AP           Clear a jammed firearm       10AP*
Climb 1 meter          4AP            Ready a weapon               5AP
Jump down  2+ meters   8AP*           Throw item < 1kg             3AP
Dive for cover         6AP            Throw item 5kg+              12AP
Go prone               1AP            Make melee attack            4AP*
Stand up (from prone)  10AP           Block melee attack           6AP*
Stand up (from seat)   5AP
Open sliding door      3AP            Other:
Open manual hatch      6AP
Open iris valve        3AP            Apply a patch to a Vacc Suit 4AP*
Open lock (w/key)      6AP
Vault low obstacle     +2AP*
Vault high obstacle    +6AP*
Swim 1 meter           6AP*
Launch in 0-g          4AP*
Cluttered area         x2 cost
Very cluttered area    x3 cost
To use Stealth skill   x2 cost


- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 17:03:13 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: TACS, an intoduction

Here it is.

This is based on my training, my experiences, and much research into to how
humans react to combat.  I hope you all find this useful, or at least
interesting.

A note aboput how people react to this system..  At first, they go balls to
the wall, spending all their APs in mad rushes and hails of fire.  This
lasts until they find themselves standing up in the middle of a field
taking hits from every direction.

Next you get the turtle syndrome.  After getting perforated a few times,
many players are afraid to spend a single AP, trying to keep all of their
points avalible for quick reactions.  Which is realistic, I suppose.

The key to this system is developing good tactical sense.  The nice thing
about doing it in a game is that you can make mistakes and live to learn
from them.

I'm going to do up the files as nice Word6.0 documents, and they and these
text files will be avalible on my web pages soon.  If you would like the
pretty versions, contact me in about a week.

Comments and criticism are hoped for.  Unless you tell me what's broken, I
can't fix it.

The version 2.1 playtesters:

Charles "A plasma hit?  That must sting!" Wheeler
William "Is the penguin armed?" Turnbow
Kirsten "I throw the grenade back AGAIN!" Berry

Dedicated to the memory of SSG Gordon Greene, US Army.
- --

+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~+
|  Douglas E. Berry       dberry@hooked.net  |
|      http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/        |
|--------------------------------------------|
|  I can please only one person per day.     |
|    Today is not your day.                  |
|     Tomorrow isn't looking good either.    |
|      -motto of Dogbert's New Ruling Class  |
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~+

  

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 16:46:01 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Task listing for TACS

Task list for TACS.
To make things easier, here are all the tasks specific to TACS.

To increase speed by sprinting:
STR+Athletics < Difficult (2.5d)
On success, speed is 2m for 2AP
Spectacular Success gives 4m per 2AP
Spectacular Failure results in a pulled muscle (1 point damage to STR, AP
costs for walking double for duration of combat)
This task may be attempted in consecutive turns by increasing the
difficulty by one level each turn.

To vault a low obstruction:
Dex+Athletics < Average (2d)
Moving more than 3m before this task makes the task Easy.

To vault a high obstruction:
Dex+Athletics < Difficult (2.5d)
Moving more than 3m before this task makes the task Average.

To gain initiative:
DEX or INT+(Applicable skill) < Average (2D6)
Opposed
APs may be spent to raise the target number
Combatant making roll by the greatest amount goes first.

To hit in melee:
Dex+Brawling or Weapon skill < Average (2D6)
Requires an AP expenditure (4AP)
AP may be spent to raise target number

To block a melee attack:
Dex+Brawling or Weapon skill < Difficult (2.5D6)
Requires an AP expenditure (6AP)
AP may be spent to raise target number
Block must be declared before attacker rolls the to hit task.

To dodge a melee attack:
Dex+Athletics < Difficult (2.5D6)
Requires an AP expenditure (6AP)
AP may be spent to raise target number
Dodge must be declared before attacker rolls the to hit task.

To grapple an opponent:
STR+Brawling < Difficult (2.5D6)
Opposed
Requires an AP expenditure (8AP)
AP may be spent to raise target number
Up to three attackers may team up against a single defender.

To escape a grappling hold:
Dex+Brawling < Formidable (3D6)
Success removes all Control Points on the combatant
Spectacular Success allows a free melee attack on the opponent
Spectacular Failure doubles the current Control Points on the combatant

To gain control of a loose item in melee:
DEX+Atheletics < Formidable (3D6)
Opposed
Requires an AP expenditure (8 AP)
AP may be spent to raise target number
If both succeed, best success gains control

To hit with a ranged weapon:
STR+Weapon Skill < Range Difficulty
Requires an AP expenditure (4 AP)
AP may be spent to raise target number

Range Difficulties:
  Range     meters      Task Level
 Contact      0-3         Easy
Very Short    4-15       Average
  Short      16-45      Difficult
 Medium      46-150     Formidable
  Long       151-400    Staggering
Very Long   451-1500    Impossible
 Distant      1500+      Hopeless

To enter a Beaten Zone:
INT+Tactics < Staggering (4D6)
Spectacular Failure results in the combatant losing all APs for two turns.

To hit with a thrown weapon:
DEX+Throwing < Range Difficulty
Requires an AP expenditure (cost depends on weight)
AP may be spent to increase target number
If task fails, check deviation

To remain conscious with a minor wound:
STR+END < Difficult (2.5D6)
This task must be attempted at the beginning of each turn.

To remain conscious with a serious wound:
STR+END < Staggering (4D6)
This task must be attempted for every action taken

To speed healing of wounds:
INT+Medical < Staggering (4D6)
Access to hospital facilities makes this task Difficult (2.5D6)
The task must be attempted for each day of healing.
Success results in a healing rate increase based on the tech level of the
doctor
Spectacular Success doubles the normal rate for the TL
Spectacular Failure causes 2D6 wounds.

Tech Level   Speed of Healing
  0-3          2pts/day
  4-5          3pts/day
  6-7          4pts/day
  8-11         5pts/day
 12-13         6pts/day
 14-15         7pts/day

To clear a malfunctioning weapon:
DEX+Weapon Skill < Average (2D6)
Requires an AP expenditure (10AP)
AP may be spent to raise target number

To maintain stability while firing in 0-g:
DEX+Environment Combat < Formidable (3D6)
Failure results in the combatant losing orientation
Spectacular Failure results in the loss of APs for the next turn

To move in 0-g:
DEX+Environment Combat or Vacc Suit < Average (2D6)
Requires an AP expenditure (4AP)
Success puts the combatant within 1 meter of her aiming point.
Speed is 10 meters per turn

To apply an emergency patch to a suit:
DEX+Vacc Suit < Difficult (2.5D6)
Requires an AP expenditure (4AP)


- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 00:08:35 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: T4.1 Task System Debate Redux

On Sat, 23 Aug 1997 17:42:23 +0000, Kenneth Bearden wrote:

> Michael Koehne wrote:
> > 
> > Moin Glenn Grant,
> > 
> >         I came up with a new (and improved task system :-) :
> > 
> >         Basics : Stats are 2d6 (1-12) while skills are (0-6)
> > 
> >         Taskresoltion : Skill >= (n-skill)d6
> > 
> >         Easy      : 3d6
> >         Average   : 4d6
> >         Difficult : 5d6
> >         Formidable: 6d6
> >         Imposible : 7d6
> > 
> >         e.g. a character with skill 3 wants to attempt a difficult
> >         task and has to roll 2d6, if he has a skill of 5 he has
> >         an automatic success.
> 
> Interesting idea, but how are you coming up with target numbers?
> 
> In your example, the level 3 character has to roll 2D6 for a Difficult
> task.  What is his target number?   Lower than what on 2D6?

This is very similar (identical?) to what Merrick posted during the
Task Wars(tm) debate a few months ago.  Target number would be equal
to the "characteristic" associated with that particular skill.
Therefore, a character with DEX 8, Pistol 2 would roll three dice for
a Difficult task, with a target number of "8 or less".  If this seems
a bit too easy, I'm sure you could change that to read "less than 8".

James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 20:06:51 -0400
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: CSC sail bug...

- --============_-1339654821==_============
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"



	I've just tried to do a sail craft, and basically, no matter how I
tweak wattage in the propulsion heading or the various power plant
variables, I can't get it to calculate a speed for me.  I'll attach a a
TL-4 sail frigate as an example.

	And again, the program rules.

- --============_-1339654821==_============
Content-Type: application/mac-binhex40; name="Sample_frigate_(TL3)"
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Sample_frigate_(TL3)"

(This file must be converted with BinHex 4.0)

:&&0KEA"XC5"QFQPRBA4P)#K86$-T!&C)3da$8d0%!!!!!!kS!!!!!$mV!!&6B@e
`E'8JCR*TCf&dC5!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)!%
!8Lj%,N9XE'P[G(3J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!
J)#!(c3!$!!%!!!!!Il`!$%#J!!!!!8'J!!!!!!!"!!&#F!!!!!%!!8*`!!!!!3!
"3D!!!!!"!!&")!!!!!&"m!!!!!%!!!!!!!%!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*!!-!!!!
!!!S"!3!"!!&&1i!!!3!!!3!!!!!!#J%!!!%!!6q!!!!"!!!23k+!!!%!!!S!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!eHPS!0A&0!!!!!!!!!!
$!!!!!!!!!$`!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!$9b+b!2!#
M!2`!XJ%c!!!!!!!!!!!!5!!!!%J!!!!!!!J!!3!)!!!!!!!!)3J!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!3%
!!!!!!2rrrrrrrrrr8C!!!!!!!2qerj`"P3)F!!!!!!!!!!!!5!!!!%J!!!!!!!J
!!3!)!!!!!!!!)3J!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!2m!rrr
rr`!!!!!!!!!!!!%!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"!!!!!!$!+-
"&!#b!6-!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!eFlJ!!HN(!!"!0A1*J#f3f&`G'&TEL!Q)%pQCQP
MCA)J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J8hGKBL!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J5@4
XCA)J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J!!d!-J!'!3!!I!!!!(`!!!!!!!!
!!3!+!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!S!!!!!!!`!!!!!!!!!$!!!!!!
!!!!-!!!!!!!!!!`!!!!!!!!!$!!!!!!!!!!-!!!!!!!!!!`!!!!!!!!!$!!!!!!
!!!!-!!!!!!!!!!`!!!!!!ET$B@jZEfiX)%KPBACj)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!
!!J!"!!%!!`!$!!i!$cmRE)Xp%h5m!!!!!!!"3NJ!!$b6G,`!!b!J)#!J)#!J)#!
J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J!!!!!!!+!ET
$B@jZEfiX)%KPBACj)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!!!J!"!!%!!`!$!!i!$cmRE)X
p%h5m!!!!!!!"3NJ!!$b6G,`!!b!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!
J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J!!!!!!!+!5"$B@jZEfiX)%KPBACj)#!J)#!
J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!!!J!"!!%!!`!$!!i!$cmRE)Xp%h5m!!!!!!!"3NJ!!$b6G,`
!!b!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!
J)#!J!!!!!!!$!ET$B@jZEfiX)%KPBACj)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!!!J!"!!%
!!`!$!!i!$cmRE)Xp%h5m!!!!!!!"3NJ!!$b6G,`!!b!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!
J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J!!!!!!!+!ET$B@jZEfi
X)%KPBACj)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!!!J!"!!%!!`!$!!i!$cmRE)Xp%h5m!!!
!!!!"3NJ!!$b6G,`!!b!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!
J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J!!!!!!!+!ET$B@jZEfiX)%KPBACj)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!
J)#!J)#!!!J!"!!%!!`!$!!i!$cmRE)Xp%h5m!!!!!!!"3NJ!!$b6G,`!!b!J)#!
J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J!!!
!!!!+!ET$B@jZEfiX)%KPBACj)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!!!J!"!!%!!`!$!!i
!$cmRE)Xp%h5m!!!!!!!"3NJ!!$b6G,`!!b!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!
J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J!!!!!!!+!ET$B@jZEfiX)%KPBAC
j)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!!!J!"!!%!!`!$!!i!$cmRE)Xp%h5m!!!!!!!"3NJ
!!$b6G,`!!b!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!
J)#!J)#!J)#!J!!!!!!!+!ET$B@jZEfiX)%KPBACj)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!
!!J!"!!%!!`!$!!i!$cmRE)Xp%h5m!!!!!!!"3NJ!!$b6G,`!!b!J)#!J)#!J)#!
J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J!!!!!!!+!ET
$B@jZEfiX)%KPBACj)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!!!J!"!!%!!`!$!!i!$cmRE)X
p%h5m!!!!!!!"3NJ!!$b6G,`!!b!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!
J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J!!!!!!!+!ET$B@jZEfiX)%KPBACj)#!J)#!
J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!!!J!"!!%!!`!$!!i!$cmRE)Xp%h5m!!!!!!!"3NJ!!$b6G,`
!!b!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!
J)#!J!!!!!!!+!ET$B@jZEfiX)%KPBACj)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!!!J!"!!%
!!`!$!!i!$cmRE)Xp%h5m!!!!!!!"3NJ!!$b6G,`!!b!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!
J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J!!!!!!!+!ET$B@jZEfi
X)%KPBACj)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!!!J!"!!%!!`!$!!i!$cmRE)Xp%h5m!!!
!!!!"3NJ!!$b6G,`!!b!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!
J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J!!!!!!!+!ET$B@jZEfiX)%KPBACj)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!
J)#!J)#!!!J!"!!%!!`!$!!i!$cmRE)Xp%h5m!!!!!!!"3NJ!!$b6G,`!!b!J)#!
J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J!!!
!!!!+!ET$B@jZEfiX)%aTCfKd)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!!!J!"!!%!!`!#!!J
!!$he`Smm!a*[!!!!!!!"3I!!!$Z$%Qm!!L!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!
J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J!!!!!!!+!ET$B@jZEfiX)%aTCfK
d)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!!!J!"!!%!!`!#!!J!!$he`Smm!a*[!!!!!!!"3I!
!!$Z$%Qm!!L!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!
J)#!J)#!J)#!J!!!!!!!+!ET$B@jZEfiX)%aTCfKd)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!
!!J!"!!%!!`!#!!J!!$he`Smm!a*[!!!!!!!"3I!!!$Z$%Qm!!L!J)#!J)#!J)#!
J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J!!!!!!!+!ET
$B@jZEfiX)%aTCfKd)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!!!J!"!!%!!`!#!!J!!$he`Sm
m!a*[!!!!!!!"3I!!!$Z$%Qm!!L!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!
J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J!!!!!!!+!ET$B@jZEfiX)%aTCfKd)#!J)#!
J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!!!J!"!!%!!`!#!!J!!$he`Smm!a*[!!!!!!!"3I!!!$Z$%Qm
!!L!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!
J)#!J!!!!!!!+!ET$B@jZEfiX)%aTCfKd)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!!!J!"!!%
!!`!#!!J!!$he`Smm!a*[!!!!!!!"3I!!!$Z$%Qm!!L!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!
J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J)#!J!!!!!!!+!!%!!3!!!!!
!#J%!!!%!!3!!!!!!#J%!!!%!!3!!!!!!#J%!!!%!!3!!!!!!#J%!!!%!!3!!!!!
!#J%!!!%!!3!!!!!!#J%!!!%!!3!!!!!!#J%!!!%!!3!!!!!!#J%!!!%!!3!!!!!
!#J%!!!%!!3!!!!!!#J%!!!%!!3%!!!S!!!!"!!%"!!!+!!!!!3!"!3!!#J!!!!%
!!3%!!!S!!!!"!!%"!!!+!!!!!3!"!3!!#J!!!!%!!3%!!!S!!!!"!!%"!!!+!!!
!!3!"!3!!#J!!!!%!!3%!!!S!!!!"!!%!!!!!!$`!!!!!!,F!!!!!!48!!!!!!!!
!!!!!ppm!!!:
- --============_-1339654821==_============
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

- --============_-1339654821==_============--

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1742
***********************************
Subj:	Traveller-digest V1997 #1743
Date:	97-08-26 10:22:21 EDT
From:	owner-traveller-digest@MPGN.COM (Traveller-digest)
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@MPGN.COM
Reply-to:	traveller@MPGN.COM
To:	traveller-digest@Phaser.ShowCase.MPGN.COM

File:  Sample frigate (TL3) (3752 bytes)
DL Time (28800 bps): < 1 minute


Traveller-digest      Sunday, August 24 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1743



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

CSC sail bug...
Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 20:06:51 -0400
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: CSC sail bug...

- --============_-1339654821==_============
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"



	I've just tried to do a sail craft, and basically, no matter how I
tweak wattage in the propulsion heading or the various power plant
variables, I can't get it to calculate a speed for me.  I'll attach a a
TL-4 sail frigate as an example.

	And again, the program rules.

- --============_-1339654821==_============
Content-Type: application/mac-binhex40; name="Sample_frigate_(TL3)"
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Sample_frigate_(TL3)"

Sample frigate
R.D.Elliott
Captain & Officer
             Swab
            Idler                         
2

Cannon, HeavyBH
Cannon, HeavyBH
Cannon, Heavy     BH
Cannon, Heavy    BH
Cannon, Heavy     BH
Cannon, Heavy     BH
Cannon, Heavy     BH
Cannon, Heavy     BH
Cannon, Heavy     BH
Cannon, Heavy     BH
Cannon, Heavy     BH
Cannon, Heavy     BH
Cannon, Heavy     BH
Cannon, Heavy     BH
Cannon, Light
Cannon, Light
Cannon, Light
Cannon, Light
Cannon, Light
Cannon, Light






Traveller-digest      Monday, August 25 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1744



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: FF&S2 HELP!
Re: Binders and other Trivia
Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations
Traveller Atlas BETA
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1740
Re: Task Resolution
Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations
Re: T4.1 Task System Debate Redux
Re: Little black books (was RE: Binders and other Trivia)
Re: Task Resolution
Re: RoM/Terra TL (TL15)
Re: New Proposal for the RoM TL Debate
Re: RoM/Terra TL (AHLs)
Re: Task Resolution

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 17:11:29 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: FF&S2 HELP!

At 03:31 PM 8/24/97 -0400, you wrote:

>*** 1.)  Table 212: Food Storage.  Does the volume include the amount of
>food, or is it in addition to the amount of food?  For example:  If I have
>2m3 of food at TL8, do I need an extra 2.4m3 for storage, or do I need 2.4m3
>total for storage in which the food is fitted?  (2m3 for the food, plus 0.4m3
>extra for the refrigiration, shelves, etc.).

At the bottom of the table it states "All values are per cubic meter of
storage capacity needed."  So i'd say that your example is correct, you do
need the extra space.  (Shelving, refrigeration units, etc..)

>*** 2.)  What is the volume of an individual workstation or crewstation?
> That is:  Is it the volume & mass of a seat + the mass of the workstation
>from the table in the book, or what?  I know that there is errata for the
>control system, but I mean JUST the volume for the workstations and
>crewstations (how can I figure out how big a bridge I need if I don't have
>the volume of the crew/workstations?).

It's workstation plus the seat.

- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 02:06:16 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: Binders and other Trivia

On Sat, 23 Aug 1997 17:50:34 -0700, scharlto@ifsna.com wrote:


> James W. Lindsay, responding to somebody else, said:
> >> In regards to the format of T4.1, has anyone ever seen "Advanced Squad
> >> Leader" by Avalon Hill.  Their rules are quite unique, presented in a
> >> format similar to the old U.S. Army manuals.
> >>   All the rules are written in pages that are in a nicely decorated 3
> >> ring binder.
> >
> > You forgot to mention the disadvantage to the ASL rulebook design...
> > that of price ($150 CAN minimum just to *play* a game of ASL was a bit
> > too much for me to make the switch).
> 
> Having worked in the publishing industry in my dark past, I thought I might
> speak up on this issue.  The ASL cost is really not a valid argument point,
> because there are a bunch of extra factors involved with that one (like you
> need to also buy a whole second game to get maps and counters also needed
> to play).

I am aware of that :)

When ASL first came out, it was $80 CAN for the rules and $70 CAN for
the first set of board sections and counters.  $150 CAN is more money
than even GW games require for play to be even possible :)

> I was one of the people who suggested a binder format for T4.  Actually, I
> suggested a binder format more for the design rules, but a binder
> nonetheless.  At that time, the arguments on the TML against the binder
> approach were:
> 
> 1.  Expense
> 2.  Complexity
> 3.  Lack of Consumer Appeal
> 
> Issue 1 (Expense) is not really an issue at all.  In fact, the binder
> approach is significantly less expensive than the hardcover approach, and
> if handled properly can be less expensive than the softcover approach.  In
> this case, "handled properly" means minimizing expenses by not having a
> printed binder cover (using an insert into a commonly-available binder with
> clear insert front and back), and not having the printer put the pages into
> the binder for you (a MAJOR increase in cost; this raised the price of a
> report I was involved in from $1.75 each to $3.80 each).  In this case, you
> either have the contents shrink-wrapped and stuffed into an empty binder
> (which is itself shrink-wrapped) OR you get the corporate staff and some
> family members together for a binder-stuffing weekend.

The overall cost might be lower but the initial cost is still quite
high.  A player new to Traveller might not want to buy each and every
T4 supplement that comes out, meaning that the cost effectiveness of a
binder format may never approach what it might if the supplements were
in softcover format (for *that* particular player, anyways).

I suppose some people might buy it as a novelty, however :)
 
> Issue 2 (Complexity) is also not an issue.  This again relates to the
> approach taken, the amount of pages in the binder, and the size of the
> binder itself.  A huge binder is unweildy.  A small binder becomes a pain
> when you are forced to "overstuff" it with too many pages.  Putting front
> and back page-guides (those little plastic inserts) really helps a lot;
> ESPECIALLY if you spend the extra $.0.25 to get the full-page sized page
> guides.  One common problem in binders without page guides is that most
> binders come with handly little pockets on the inside front and back
> covers, which gamers invariably take advantage of.  However, when the book
> is opened/closed, the front/back pages will get tangles with the contents
> of the pockets, and cause a mess.  Small page guides will also do this
> sometimes, but the LARGE page guides will NEVER have this problem.

Ever play Star Fleet Battles?  The rulebook became quite cumbersome
after a while and entire pages often needed to be reprinted to correct
errata (often with plenty of white space as well).
 
> Issue 3 (Lack of Consumer Appeal) is a VERY LEGITIMATE issue.  A little
> history here.  There have been many games released in the binder format.
> Most have been small-quantity printings, with very low quality artwork and
> production values.  A few of teh industry biggies have also delved into
> this; most notably Avalon Hill (Advanced Squad Leader) and TSR (Monstrous
> Compendiums).  Both projects used printed binder covers.  The Avalon Hill
> binder was actually very good quality, and came with a very nice slipcase
> cover, which certainly inflated the cost considerably.  However, most of
> the cost of the ASL rules binder is due to the very small print run and the
> very high operating expenses Avalon Hill has to deal with.  Remember,

I bet that there are more ASL players than T4 players :)

> wargames have seriously lost market share, and for Avalon Hill to continue
> making wargames for a more limited audience, it has to charge more money
> for its product (more even than IG does for T4).  On the other side of the
> coin, the TSR effort was very poor quality; the binder was very shoddy, and
> the paper contents were so thin and poorly drilled (adding the holes for
> the binder) that most copies fell apart after only a few uses.  My FLGS had
> many returns on this product due to this problem, and eventually TSR moved
> back into the normal hardcover format.

IMHO, it would be a bad idea to go with a binder format for the main
rulebook-- it would never survive all of the referencing and cross
referencing.

Supplements that covered weapons, starships, vehicles, and other
equipment *might* be plausible, but only if someone could convince T4
that it would be worth the effort.  A guarantee of some sort would
have to be made that packets of starship or weapon designs would be
produced on a somewhat consistent basis, for example.  Or perhaps a
packet could be produced on an annual or bi-annual basis that included
data sheets covering weapons, starships, vehicles, /and/ equipment.

As long as each page contained the write up for a single, complete
item, I don't see a logistic problem with the binder format.  By
trying to squeeze two or three items on to a single sheet of paper,
however, you begin to lose options as to how you categorize the pages
in your binder.

I guess that I would probably be sold on the idea of selling the T4
supplements in binder format, *if* it was done right to begin with.
If it wasn't, however, you could end up with a mess like TSR had.  And
of course our European friends might not appreciate having to track
down North American 3-ring binders :)

James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 21:21:55 -0500 (CDT)
From: Joseph "Chepe" Lockett <jlockett@io.com>
Subject: Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations

Quoth SemoFetus@aol.com:
> the other dilemna is, since I am using FF&S2 manuever drives, would
> they work?  The Comet or Iceteroid wouldn't be huge like a star or
> anything.  I hope that manuever drives DON'T work here, because 
> I've just gotten visions of HEPlaR tug boats pulling ships out to 100 
> diameters of the comet.

Disclaimer: I don't yet own FF&S2 -- I'm checking tomorrow to see if my
FNSLGS has received it yet, here in the wilds of Houston, TX.

If thruster plates still work under the grav limits postulated when we
were hashing them out on gdw-beta for the ill-fated STARSHIPS (and I still
have the math worked up somewhere....), then their useful radius of effect
around a typical icy body will be limited to a few tens of kilometers or
so -- rather too small to allow for useful jump breakout.  So your HEPlaR
tugs should be safe.  :-)

However, I seem to recall hearing someone on-list claim that FF&S2 had
moved the "boundary" for thruster plates out to 2000 AU or so, rather than
the 60-70 we'd originally postulated, and again making Oort clouds a valid
refuelling point.  If it's true (can anyone confirm?), I may have to re-do
some of the math for my own self-satisfaction, and jump breakout within
useful maneuvering range might indeed be possible.

- ----------------------------*------------------------*------------------------
 Joseph L. "Chepe" Lockett  |"Nullum magnum ingenium | GURPS fan, Amiga user,
http://www.io.com/~jlockett | sine mixtura dementiae | Shakespearean scholar,
  Email: jlockett@io.com    | fuit." -- Seneca       | actor and director.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 04:48:04 +0200
From: Mats Erlandsson <mats.erlandsson@mailbox.swipnet.se>
Subject: Traveller Atlas BETA

Terra Corporation Proudly Presents : 

The Traveller Atlas BETA version 0.40

The program includes the following modules:
Sector Atlas
Sector Generator
Subsector Atlas

For Windows 95 systems only!
(Probably works on NT systems as well.)

The program is absolutely FREE!

To check out the program (images available) and perhaps download it. Go to:
http://home1.swipnet.se/~w-11224/Traveller/

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 00:25:12 -0400
From: Paul Kestner <paully@bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1740

Traveller-digest wrote:
>   <<<< snipity-do-da, snipity-day ...... >>>>
> The thick black line at the bottom is the border <g>.
> Not sure how they mark that in space....
> 
>  << more snip >>

  Silly sentient,  borders are marked in space the
same way they are marked on a map,  with ink. (OK,
sometimes blood.)    You jump a ship out to the 
border site,  spray color pigments of your choice
about into space,  and jump back to base.  You have
just 'marked' one pixel in your border design.
   Repeat as required by design detail,  and budget
constraints permiting.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 14:23:41 +1000
From: Jason Anderson <midnight@kagi.com>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

Why is it this debate seems to come up every two months or so? Must be
something in the water. Oh well.


>Here is the actual expected statistics table for tasks (including 2.5D for
>Difficult).

[snip]

> For example Skill-5 and Characteristic-4
>produces S+C of 9. Read the probability of success at Formidable Difficulty
>as 38%.

The problem being that very few PCs would have an attribute at 4.

Looking at a few of the numbers on the table, I feel that the percentages
are too high. If you are sticking with the S+C (which has advantages and
disadvantages), I think just go with a straight 2D (easy) to 7D
(impossible). But then that invalidates all the recently published
material. So it probably wont happen. Oh well.

Just my 0.02c on the discussion.

* Engaging lurking device *

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, 24 Aug 1997 19:59:52 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations

In mail you write:

> Now, when I connected the two subsectors together and saw the two
> huge mains, visions of Free Trader unions danced in my head,
> massive subsector wide lines as well.  I loved it.  One problem is,
> though, that on one of the mains, there is a very low tech world lacking
> both starport and gas giant.  ie.  dead end.

Does it have oceans? If so, many ships can still refuel.

> In trying to figure out a way around this, I thought about a calibration
> point much like the ones from the TNE Regency sourcebook.  When
> I looked for a location, this seemed too perfect because the logical
> place for the calibration point would connect both of the mains,
> thus roughly doubling the amount of worlds that can be reached by
> a J-1 trader...
>
> My dilemna is:  Is there a source for rough prices of starports?  I
> think I saw some discussion a little while back.  In addition, the
> other dilemna is, since I am using FF&S2 manuever drives, would
> they work?  The Comet or Iceteroid wouldn't be huge like a star or
> anything.  I hope that manuever drives DON'T work here, because 
> I've just gotten visions of HEPlaR tug boats pulling ships out to 100 
> diameters of the comet.

It's *possible* for the icy body to be as big as a planet. Not
*likely*, but possible. That ought to let the thruster plates work for
a ways out.

But the tugs will work too. :-)

In fact, the published jump co-ordinates might have you pop up quite a
ways from the port, with just a radio beacon. The port sends out the
tug to bring you in. That way, if there's a war, only folks with the
right ID codes will get to use the station. You just turn off the
beacon, and they can't get to you.... (It's a bit more complex than
that, but I'm sure that you can figure it out).

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 00:55:39 -0400 (EDT)
From: pawn@CAM.ORG (Glenn Grant)
Subject: Re: T4.1 Task System Debate Redux

Michael Koehne said,

>Moin Glenn Grant,
>        I came up with a new (and improved task system :-) :
>
>        Basics : Stats are 2d6 (1-12) while skills are (0-6)
>
>        Taskresoltion : Skill >= (n-skill)d6
>
>        Easy      : 3d6
>        Average   : 4d6
>        Difficult : 5d6
>        Formidable: 6d6
>        Imposible : 7d6
>
>        e.g. a character with skill 3 wants to attempt a difficult
>        task and has to roll 2d6, if he has a skill of 5 he has
>        an automatic success.

I remember it. I toyed with a similar idea when I was working on a D66 task
system, late last year. But I decided that a single skill level is not
roughly equivalent to one Difficulty level, as in your system. In my D66
system, three levels of skill resulted in a reduction of one level of
difficulty. (The D66 system had a number of fatal flaws, of course...;)

In any case, your system as described above doesn't seem to involve Stats
in the target number, as in T4. Thus your skill-3 example character needs
to roll a 3 or less on 2D6 to succeed at a Difficult Task. That means he
has an 8.3% chance of success. Not too good, no?

Best,

   + GMG +



    -----------------------Glenn Grant-----------------------  
                         <pawn@cam.org>
    Web: <http://helios.physics.utoronto.ca:8080/ggrant.html>
"Nature abhors normality. It can't go too long without a mutant."
                        --Dr Blockhead

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 07:08:27 +0100
From: Simon Early <sre@taz.compulink.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Little black books (was RE: Binders and other Trivia)

I> The first thing I did with FFS2 was take it down to Kinko's and have the
> binding cut off.  Then I put everything into page protectors and shoved the
> whole shebang into a binder.

And my flatmate said I was the saddest person in the Universe when I did this 
with FF&S ... hah, now I can prove I'm "normal" :-)

Simon

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 23:09:02 -0600
From: lguatney@carbon.cudenver.edu (Leroy William Lu Guatney)
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

On Fri, 22 Aug 1997 15:40:50 +0000
Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com> writes:
>
>Rob Prior wrote:
>
>> Assumign that level 6 is an average for a 'professional' skill level, then
>> your typical 30-year old would have 12x1.25=15 skill levels.  If they put
>> half into their main skill, they have a level 7: quite respectable.
>
>
>But, skills in T4.1 will not be like this, according to Marc's post
>today.  He said that character's skills will average between 2-4, just
>like in CT/MT.
>
>You might get an occassional level 7, but that happened in CT too.
>
>Given this information, based on Marc's empiracle (how do you spell that
>word anyway?) evidence, we don't need new skill definitions.
>
>Kenneth.
>

Sorry, but I have not followed all of this thread.  If what Kenneth is
saying above is true, then why did we boost the Broker Skill to the new
tables.  IIRC, Broker-8 is now the +4 DM at Starports.

I know Marc said he was going to adopt it, but is Broker +4 DM going to
be that common?


Leroy Guatney - lwlg@usa.net
 University of Mars, NorthAm Campus
 Class of '98

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 23:09:02 -0600
From: lguatney@carbon.cudenver.edu (Leroy William Lu Guatney)
Subject: Re: RoM/Terra TL (TL15)

On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 00:09:43 -0400
hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale) writes:
>
[snippish biggish]
>   It is entirely consistent for Terra to be early TL 15 in 1000, TL 11
>during the Long Night, TL 12 during the RoM, and TL 10-12 during the
>Interstellar Wars.


Well, not really Harold, but _that_ is an entirely different discussion.


>   While I:E provides us some clues to the TL of Terra c. 1000, it is
>not even remotely a valid source of information for TL info on the RoM. 
>Far too much time had passed between the two eras.


Harold, you have to take the _big_ picture into view when deciphering
canon properly.  Also, I would not have spent so much time on this if it
weren't important.  Another also, is this really ties into the _very_
fabric of T4 and Milieu 0, which no canonist has taken into consideration.

Chris Griffen, this is the beautiful elegance I told you about before.
Thanks for waiting, as well as all the "help".  I owed you one until
recently, if you get my drift. ;-)

We have absolutely proved that Terra was TL14 (CT) and a _very_ reasonable
assertion for the possibility of TL15 at the outset of the Rim War.  Given
the MT +1 DM to CT sources, Terra was TL15 (MT) at the outset of the Rim
War.

Since the Imperium only reached TL15 in 1000, and the Solomani had gone
it alone since 871, then the TI did not make Terra TL15 with the Imperium's
help, and this is consistent with other knowledge.  Given that this view is
consistent with the Martian Terraforming project of 395, the Terrans have
been Common TL15 all through the pre-TI contact period of the planet's history.

Of course, both sides of this whole discussion have been riddled with
assumptions.  The material is vague, and as my earlier post pointed out,
we have room for any RoM TL, 12-16.  If T4 says it was "known maximum" of
15, that is _perfectly_ good enough for me.  Afterall, canon _really_ is what
we want it to be--nothing else.

If someone wants to point out that the TI was TL14 in 700, just before the
formation of the Solomani Autonomous Region, then we have a major threat to
the canonist movement, and we can't have that, now can we. :)  Oh yes, I
am sure some rationalization can be had that explains all of that, but isn't
that what I've been trying to do?  <Rhetorical>  Besides, nobody can claim
that I didn't examine all the "facts," now can they.

Acceptance of this kind of information trying evaluate/analyze the game
eventually comes down to a few plausible views.  There is no reason that
one is better than any other in the end.  We have all had good ideas for
an intentional/unintentional departure from the "canon", and I contend that
it is the quality of the writing, and reasonableness of the arguments, that
when we get a new Traveller book, we are persuaded to accept it into a
constantly modified and updated view of our own "canons" (sp?).

I look forward to _everything_ that T4 et al puts out, and that for me is
no different than all of the other Travellers I have played/collected/
enjoyed.  Even MT, the missing milieu for me.  Even TNE. (he really said
that? :)


>Harold
>

As I will soon say, I have had fun here.  Thanks.


Leroy Guatney - lwlg@usa.net
 University of Mars, NorthAm Campus
 Class of '98

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 23:09:02 -0600
From: lguatney@carbon.cudenver.edu (Leroy William Lu Guatney)
Subject: Re: New Proposal for the RoM TL Debate

On Fri, 22 Aug 1997 19:45:59 -0400
Daniel Ray Lane <drlane@pinn.net> writes:
>
>How about framing this debate in the setting of Milieu 0 or Milieu
>1100?  
>
>Both Leroy's camp (the "Solomanists") and the "Imperialists" make 
>excellent points that support their theses.  I can imagine that this 
>debate really DID rage among academicians, industrialists and scouts
>of the early Imperium.  Perhaps it persisted in Imperial circles well 
>into the 1100.  A precendent is the whole modern "lost civilizations" 
>discussion (i.e. Atlantis, Antarctica, etc...)
>
>It makes for both a mystery and interesting discussion, tending to add
>an extra dimension to a universe.  Things like "Anomalies" would have 
>added tremendous fuel to the fire (and uncertainty to individuals'
>basic assumptions. 
>
>Here's my suggestion (actually an enthusiastic request.  Both groups
>agree on the milieu that the debate occured most vigorously in.
>Create a "academic persona," a notable authority on the RoM or its
>relics.  Then have at it, in character, on the list.  
>
>Structure the discussion as an entertaining and informative debate 
>(with footnotes to cite Canon sources).
>
>Of course, most of the basic arguments have been advanced.  I just would
>like to know who the old coots scrapping over this were.  Develop their
>backgrounds, families, etc...  Did any of them have eligible college
>aged daughters eager to prove their parents' assertions?
>
>Could be interesting!  Anyone else think so?
>
>- -Dan Lane
>

Dan, could I play the guy that has been on (Vilani) anagathics since the
First Contact at Barnard, and is in Milieu 1100 debating those young
"upstarts" barely a century old? :)  [That's a joke Doug. <G>]

Remember, I never said this was debate--I still contend it was a
discussion of ideas.  Afterall, the whole thing source wise is very,
well, debatable as your normal set of facts.  What I think it was, was
a rather large information set that had been overlooked, and some still
want it to be overlooked, in the name of canon.

Seriously, thanks for the enthusiasm.  Unfortunately, Monday (8/15), it's
back to school for this bucko, and I have three priorities for the near
future on the internet:

  o A web page post that I made two years ago on a Genealogy web page
    looking for info, has resulted in my finding a 3rd cousin I never
    knew I had, and I have a lot of work to do with her via e-mail/web/etc.
    (BTW, if anyone is related to the Virginia Norfleet's, c.1780, we may
     be relatives :)

  o I have two projects in the works for T4 that I need to dedicate some
    non-slack time to

  o And of course there is the matter of daily life getting in the way

I will be descending to the Lurker depths (that's about two below the
depth-charge level I was at when I joined TML a few months ago) and just
watching for news.  I won't be able to keep up with everything, but if
someone things my attention is needed, send me a note offline with digest
number and I can go from there.  It will take a lot for me to get back up
to periscope level again, and there is always a fresh supply of torpedoes
for those canon shipping lanes. :)

But seriously, I have enjoyed my stay on TML.  I will say this--the folks
that keep the list humming should be congratulated, as well as Marc for
occasional wake-up calls.  I know what it takes to get the info, read and
absorb, and post coherently a thoughtful response.  Whether you know canon
or the rules or your own thing, you should be commended for keeping it up.

Perhaps some feathers were ruffled, or maybe it was just a particularly hot
summer.  But my "leaving" is on much better terms than when I got here and
said, "hello, is anybody home?"  I thank the gentleman posters for giving
me more ideas and helping spell out the nature of the Traveller universe:

  "It really is what we choose to make of it, and we are all better
   for the influence it has had on us."  --Leroy, 1997

I also thank Suzette Dollar for sharing her opinion with me, and thus
allowing me to share mine with her. :)  <Did you ever write that note?>

Doug may try to say that this is "cutting and running" again, but you know
what?  Neural pathways get accustomed to the same old thing, time after time
and that can lead to stagnation.  <Someone, check this guy's sources!>

I have had enough fun here that I may be back, time permitting, but then I
may not.  While I enjoyed my stay here (thanks to Marc), it is not the world
and I do have a lot to do.

Goodbye, thanks for all the fish, and I'll see some of you on HIWG list.


Leroy Guatney - lwlg@usa.net
 University of Mars, NorthAm Campus
 Class of '98

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 23:09:02 -0600
From: lguatney@carbon.cudenver.edu (Leroy William Lu Guatney)
Subject: Re: RoM/Terra TL (AHLs)

On Tue, 19 Aug 1997 14:21:59 -0700 (DIGEST #1716)
bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh) writes:
>
>I assume the AHL reference is the scenario in which the Solamani try to capture
>a disabled AHL-class. The text clearly implies (a) the TL-14 AHL original
>configuration is state of the art Imperial for the time of the Rim War, and
>(b) the Solomani thought that this TL-14 ship was worth capturing for the
>sake of its technology (even a solomani propoganda document talks about how
>advanced it is!) To me, this clearly implies that the Imperium was TL-14 at
>the time of the Rim War, and that the Solomani were less advanced (whether 
>mostly TL-13 or TL-14 can be argued about.)
>
[snippish largish]
>
>Bruce
>

Then ...

On Wed, 20 Aug 1997 20:19:35 -0600 (DIGEST #1723)
lguatney@carbon.cudenver.edu (Leroy William Lu Guatney) writes:

[snippish biggish]

>I agree about the value of J-6.  Also, even in 1110, the Imperium staple
>was J-4 ships (see Fighting Ships, CT S9, and Spinward Marches Campaign).
>Another reason AHLs might be of value for their unusually longer legs.
>
>Leroy Guatney - lwlg@usa.net


Bruce!  Thanks for pointing out the scenarios in the "Rules Booklet:
Azhanti High Lightning."  They helped in a past analysis of the AHLs
that I had attempted with HG rules, and I found new/more Gazelle Class
Close Escort ship names for my HG web pages.  I have been overlooking
those scenarios for usual library data searches.  (Also let me say that
Strephon had _excellent_ taste in Wine. :)


Assuming your reference to a "solomani propaganda document" is page 27 of
the above reference,

  "Incident I - The Battle of Kagukhasaggan 2   Year of the Imperium 1002",

it tells of the how Bard Endeavour held the line at the above battle, to
allow the rest of the Imperial task force to flee from Strike Force Daring,
the BE being sacrificed, and some crew fled the "glowing wreck" of the Bard
Endeavour.  The survivors were caught and interrogated by the Solomani,
and it was determined that the hulk could make a "short in-system" jump, so
allowing for the "Recovery of the Bard Endeavour in relatively in tact
with its high amperage tritium accelerator and sophisticated meson screens
could mean the difference between victory and defeat for the Solomani
independence movement."

If you check the Fleet Intruder USP in "Supplement 5: Lightning Class
Cruisers", you'll see that the FI-6333 sports a factor-6 meson screen, which
is top-notch TL14 technology.  Plus, nobody ever said that the Solomani had
anything inferior, there are plenty of technical reasons it is good policy
to effect a capture of the Bard Endeavour.  You wouldn't claim that the
reason DoD/CIA would like to get their hands on a MiG during the cold war,
that it was because of our (American) inferior technology, would you?

Also, the _first_ item listed was the PA gun, which _all_ of the above
applies to as well.

Finally, I could never get the numbers to balance using 2nd ed. High Guard,
when I tried to "rebuild" it using those rules.  That is in all probability
due to the fact that it was an HG 1st ed. design, with a converted USP
provided.  I think it would be fair to say that, given the context of the
MT refit of the Solomani, and the fact that we then learned the Imperium
reached TL15 a century earlier (the Zho attempt to capture the "new" RF-128
Rampart fighters [TL15] points the revision out) it would make full sense
to give the AHLs a TL15 powerplant, which would also be a "prize" to the
Solomani, and might allow me to do a design that better rationalizes the
USP of the class ships.

As well, there is always the old MT general +1 to TL of CT sources.

Thanks for your input.

As a wrap-up post will indicate, I am not going to be dedicating any more
bandwidth to TML.  As you yourself know, we both have something a little more
important to work on, and I plan to be getting back to that.  BTW, I found
the missing text.


Leroy Guatney - lwlg@usa.net
 University of Mars, NorthAm Campus
 Class of '98

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 23:10:34 -0700
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

Sat, 23 Aug 1997 17:59:59 +0000, Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com>
>> Wouldn't it be better to define skill levels based on the final
>> target number?  A pilot is going to be regarded as competant
>> based on his ability to perform, not on how many hours he
>> has had some teacher jabber at him.  A Dex 3 character is
>> going to have to do a lot more to pass the pilots test than
>> a Dex 11 character.

>Very interesting idea, David.  I like it.  How would you do it?

You just decide that a target number regardless of how you compute
it, represents a certain ability.  For example, if target
number = skill + stat, then you might decided that to be a qualified
pilot a character might be represented by a target number of
11, regardless of whether he has stat 7 skill 4 or stat 9 skill 2.

More talented people will reach the level require level of ablity
faster (though they might get held up by being limited at the rate
that he is being taught).

____________________________
Summers@Alum.MIT.edu

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1744
***********************************
Traveller-digest      Monday, August 25 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1745



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: What I'd like to see--Task Resolution
RE: Max skill level
Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations
Re: History skill
Used Traveller Items Spotted...
Figuring Height and Weight
Winded
Beginnings v0.95beta (DOS) is out!
Blowthrough
TACS- some observations
Pocket Empires JavaScript
humour
Ling Logo
re: Cartoon Nostalgia
Re: Task Resolution
Re: Phil Foglio

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 04:27:17 -0400 (EDT)
From: pawn@CAM.ORG (Glenn Grant)
Subject: Re: What I'd like to see--Task Resolution

Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com> said,
>
>Eris Reddoch wrote:
>
>> Ok, what constitutes a fix of "the problem of characteristics having too
>> much influence over skills", IYO?
>
>Simple.  T4.1 has to survive this test:
>Edu-7, Medical-4 character has a better chance of success than a Edu-11,
>Medical-1 character.
>When that happens, I'll consider the problem fixed.
>Kenneth.

Did you not notice when Marc posted the probability chart for the current
draft T4.1 Task System? Here are the probabilities for the characters you
describe:

         Easy    Avg     Diff    For     Sta     Imp     Hop
 S+C     1D      2D      2.5D    3D      4D      5D      6D
 11      -       97%     82%     63%     24%     6%      1%
 15      -       -       100%    95%     66%     31%     10%

So it ain't fixed. The novice with the high stat always beat the pro with
the average stat.

This is what I've been going to great pains to point out. At present, the
T4.1 system uses the old CT skill values (1 Novice, 3 Professional, 4
Expert, etc), though it doesn't literally say so. But it's still quite
possible for many characters to have one skill in the 8-13 range, which is
far beyond any skill level I ever saw on any CT character sheet. Worse, the
dice codes are not much different from T4. So nothing has changed. Nothing
has been done to deal with the problem you describe.

As I said in a previous post, either Chargen should be altered such that
the typical professional skill level is 6-8, or Marc should adopt KBV2.0's
skill multiplier. *Something* has to be done to boost the effect of skills
in relation to that of stats, or the problem is not yet cured.

 + GMG +

    -----------------------Glenn Grant-----------------------  
                         <pawn@cam.org>
    Web: <http://helios.physics.utoronto.ca:8080/ggrant.html>
"Nature abhors normality. It can't go too long without a mutant."
                        --Dr Blockhead

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 04:27:24 -0400 (EDT)
From: pawn@CAM.ORG (Glenn Grant)
Subject: RE: Max skill level

Andrew Boulton sez,

>> That applied to maximum total number of skill levels per character. I was
>> asking whether there was a limit to how many levels you can have in a given
>> skill.
>>  
>> I think 15 is a sensible limit, since stats are also capped at 15.
>
>How about the value of the controlling stat, so an average PC has a max skill 
>of 7?

Hmmm. The problem with that idea is that any skill can be linked to just
about any characteristic, depending on the situation. Pilot skill is
usually linked to Dex, but there are situations where it might be linked to
Edu, or Int.

I'm inclined to rescind the question and assume that there's no upper limit
to skills. But I'd be nice to have a task system that took that into
account.

 + GMG +

    -----------------------Glenn Grant-----------------------  
                         <pawn@cam.org>
    Web: <http://helios.physics.utoronto.ca:8080/ggrant.html>
"Nature abhors normality. It can't go too long without a mutant."
                        --Dr Blockhead

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 09:14:53 +0100
From: Simon Early <sre@taz.compulink.co.uk>
Subject: Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations

> Why a dead end? Develop it.

Great idea - I assume that the world is an X starport (which I still play as 
an Interdicted world), which means that the Navy or Scouts are interdicting 
thw world.  

#News Flash# <Megacorporation X> have just negotiated rights to set up a 
refuelling station in the oort cloud of <the system>.  While the cost of 
setting up this station means that fuel is more expensive than normal, it does 
allow J-1 vessels to exploit the main more effectively.

Jump co-ordinates are 735-398-001.

<later>

#News Flash# Tensions rose a notch in <the system> when Oberlindes Lines 
announced the start of construction of a refueling station to compete with the 
<Megacorporation X> facility established earlier this year.  A price war has 
developed and fuel prices are now similar to Imperial Standard.

Marc hault Oberlindes commented "There are no precedents for the rights to 
monopolistic exploitation of an oort cloud and, we believe, many relevant 
counter-examples.  Oberlindes Lines, and our legal team, believe that anyone 
can mine the oort cloud for fuel or other resouces".

The Oberlindes facilities are approximately 100 million km (1 AU) from the 
<megacorporation X> faciliy, at jump coordinates 735-387-004.

#News Flash# The new Oberlindes Lines refueling station in <the system's> oort 
cloud came online today, considerably earlier than anyone had expected.  A 
100,000 T war-surplus tanker acts as the main station with the numerous 
shuttles collecting and purifying ice from the comets and returning to the 
mothership when full.  Commentators have noted that the Oberlindes facility is 
a shrewd move and significantly more cost effective than the custom built 
<Megacorporation X> facility.

#News Flash# A nuclear explosion in <the system> has started a new legal fight 
in <the system>.  The explosion damaged several Oberlindes fuel shuttles.  A 
spokesbeing for <Megacorporation X> stated that "the explosion was used to 
allow more accurate mapping of comets.  More accurate mapping will allow us to 
improve prospecting costs and so reduce the price of fuel to the end-user.  We 
had no idea that Oberlindes shuttles were operating in the area of the 
explosion, and regret the any accidental damage".

<Megacorporation X> has agreed to inform Oberlindes of future operations based 
on this technique.

#News Flash#  Oberlindes won a temporary injunction against <Megacorporation 
X> today at <sub-sector capital>.  The injunction prevents <Megacorporation X> 
from using neclear explosions to map the oort cloud in <the system>.  The 
Oberlindes' lawyers case turned on the visibility of the explosions on the 
main world in the system, which is interdicted. as these could impact the 
development of the society.

No spokesbeings were available for comment from either side.

#News Flash# Oberlindes announce the relocation of their year-old refuelling 
facility in <the system> to jump co-ordinates 735-373-008.  The new 
co-ordinates are further than ever from the <Megacorporation X> facility, and 
move the facility into a region where a high concentration of ice comets has 
been identified.

In a related story, <Megacorporation X> has just taken delivery of the first 
tranch of mass drivers.  the mass drivers will be installed on large comets, 
which can be manouvred closer to the main reprocessing facility for easier 
exploitation.  The move follows successful trials several months ago.  The 
new technique is expected to reduce operating costs significantly.

#News Flash# <The system> boasts independent miners.  Following last months 
reports from <an asteroid belt nearby> it seems that belters are relocating to 
<the system> to mine and locate ice comets for <Megacorporation X>.  One 
belter said "it may not be as glamourous as asteroid mining, but it's good 
solid income while I get a stake together to repair the damage to my ship"

A number of belters, or icicles as they are termed here, are also reported to 
be working for the rival Oberlindes facility, which has recently had 
difficulty dealing with demand for fuel, forcong prices up.

Transit through the system has risen steadily since the first refueling 
station was built, and is believed to be over 1 million cargo-tons per month.



> If you are still at the design stage of your universe; simply add the Gas Giant.

No, don't do it!  You will miss out on a brilliant adventure site!  I have 
always been a supporter of the "explain the bizzare UWP" rather than "change 
the bizzare UWP".  Invariably the "explain" route leads me to a more 
interesting universe.


Simon

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 09:45:30 +0100
From: John_Wood@cbtsys.com
Subject: Re: History skill

"I think that the most widely known Hiver manipulation, that of the K'Kree,
is probably considered mostly a failure by the Hivers, simply because it
_is_ so well known..."

IIRC, part of the manipulation process as outlined in TNE was that, to be
successful, the manipulation should be revealed by the manipulator when it
has taken effect so that he/she/it can be recognized for their achievement.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 05:03:10 -0400 (EDT)
From: FKiesche@aol.com
Subject: Used Traveller Items Spotted...

Greetings All:

Dragon's Trove (e-mail drgntrov@mars.superlink.net) has the following
Traveller items for sale:

N20 - Arrival Vengeance (Megatraveller, GDW) - shrink wrapped, MINT 
$13.00

N21 - Assignment Vigilante (Megatraveller, GDW) - shrink wrapped, MINT 
$12.00

N22 - The Traveller Book (GDW) softcover - VG/NM shape, minor wear. 
$16.00

N19 - World Builders Guidebook (Megatraller, Digest Group) - VG/NM
shape, some spine wear.  $25.00

The owner (Michael Cox) is a good person and has never stiffed me. He is
courteous, quick and willing to maintain want lists (hint, hint, hint to you
all out there...). E-mail him (drgntrov@mars.superlink.net), NOT ME, if you
are interested in any of the items.

Fred Kiesche
(FKiesche@aol.com)

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 97 22:54:13 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Figuring Height and Weight

On 08/24/97 at 04:20 PM,  Sam Thomas <sinbad@dfw.net> said:

>>>And most Vargr at 2d6, Aslan at 4d6, etc. I like it, and the breaks look OK
>>>to me.

>Hmmm according to my copy of V&V the vargr males mass 60kg and the females
>55kg, so by the chart above they sould be 3D6.

And the Human male masses 80kg? ;->  

You know I don't play the "c" game.  ;-> I've always had the Vargr mass in
a range of 40 to 60kg, averaging around 50, in my games so Doug's rules
work for me.

BTW, I figure Human Height and Weight (mass) with the following process:

Roll 2d6 for Statue:  2 to 5  Short
                      6 to 8  Average
                      9 to 12 Tall

Height = 140 + (Statue*6)cm    

                        (range is 152cm to 212cm, mean 182cm)

Roll 2d6 for Build:  2 to 5   Slight
                     6 to 8   Medium
                     9 to 12  Heavy

Weight (mass) = Height - 140 + (Build*6)kg 
                        
                        (range is 24kg to 144kg, mean 84km)

Having the numbers *and* a description comes in handy.  I wouldn't give
exact heights and weights of NPC's to players, I'd describe someone as tall
with a medium build, or say "She was short and slight."

Now, consider...Statue and Build should have a major effect on a
character's Strength.  One way I've done STR in the past is
(Build+Statue+2d6)/3,dn.


Eris

- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 07:00:16 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
Subject: Winded

Here's a rule I tried out tonight.  I wanted to get some feedback 
from the rest of you Traveller GMs out there and see what you think.

One of my players had a real problem with this one, but I think it is 
a good rule.  I was hoping some of you can get my thinking straight 
if I'm wrong about this one.

Here's what happened.  A PC shot a bad guy in the chest with a 
shotgun (we're using Glenn Grant's hit location chart).  The bad guy 
was wearing diplo under his long coat.  The shotgun did not 
penetrate, and I applied 2 points of blunt trauma damage since the 
armor is flexible.

Here's where the controversey came in.

If you get shot in the chest--I don't care if you are wearing some 
type of balliistic armor like diplo--the shit hurts!  It is still 
like getting hit in the chest with a sledge hammer,and it will 
probably wind you and knock you down real fast.

So, I gave the NPC, who was hit, a 2 dice Dex check to remain on his 
feet.  If he makes this check, then he withstood the blow, and we go 
on in the round as normal.

Our NPC did not make his Dex check, and the force of the shotgun 
blast blew him into the wall before he crumpled to the floor.

Now the guy only took two points of damage, so other than being 
thrown into the wall and winded, he only took some bruises from the 
shotgun blast.

I allowed him an End roll (2 dice check) at the beginning of each 
round.  If he makes this roll, he has recovered and can get up and 
move about normally.  If he doesn't, there is no action this round 
because he's still trying to suck wind into his lungs and get over 
the fact that a freight train just slammed into his chest.

If he fails the roll, he can try again at the beginning of next round 
with no penalty.  He will remain winded and unable to act until he 
can make his End roll.  After that, he can move and act normally.

What do you guys think?  I think this is a good roll and much more 
realistic than some guy taking a shotgun blast in the chest (albeit 
protected by the flak vest style diplo armor), shrugging it off, and 
going on about his business as if he had just been bitten by a 
mosquito.

Am I being too harsh here?  Or do you think this is a good roll?

....just curious about what the rest of you think.

Kenneth.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 09:16:17 -0400
From: "Paul D. Owensby" <pauld@athens.net>
Subject: Beginnings v0.95beta (DOS) is out!

The latest version of Beginnings, the character generator for T4 is now up
on the Pan-Imperia webpage. It's just about up to the point where the 
magic "1.0" gets slapped on it :) , I've just got to do some cosmetic work
and rearrange a couple of bits for clarity. As always, let me know of any
bugs, comments, suggestions for improvement, etc., and remember that I
am not a programmer by trade and am basically learning this all as I go, so
let's remember that when making suggestions :)

New in this version of Beginnings:

v0.95:  Released 25 August 1997.

        1) Added Glenn Grant's Life Events System. Thanks, Glenn!
	
        2) Fixed the TL Bug where the modifier for Starport Class was being
        added to the Homeworld TL roll *twice*, thus making the average Home-
        world TL an "F" instead of "C".

        3) Pension amounts are now listed when you choose to print the char-
        acter out, not just when saving to file; they also show up during the
        mustering out process. 

        4) I *think* I've finally fixed the Rank Bug where characters who went
        to one of the Academies or the OTC/NOTC program did not retain their
        rank during the course of their career. 

        5) Fixed the Honors Bug; the Honors status of a grad of one of the 3
        Academies is now reset for each character.

        6) Fixed a couple of spelling errors, did a few cosmetic additions,
        color changes, etc.

        7) Added the Help Pages, and enabled exiting the program at any menu.
        You may also get an updated listing of your skill and stat levels at
        (almost) any menu.

        8) Removed the skill levels from the career tables. This was something
        that I had started implementing, but a) the abilitiy to call up a list
        of current skills rendered it superfluous, b) you would have had to
        call up the skill list to find out levels in cluster skills anyway,
        and c) it makes formatting the tables a *hell* of a lot easier :)

        9) Added the Diplomat and Bureaucrat careers from Pocket Empires.

        10) Fixed bug in Scout enlistment where automatic eligibility was
        allowed with an Intelligence of 7+ instead of 8+.

        11) Fixed bug in Agent career where they did not receive skills during
        a term in which they were injured.

Thanks for trying it out, and I hope it's useful.

**********************************************************
Paul Darius Owensby (pauld@athens.net)                   
ValuJump Lines:"So Economical, You'll Think You're Part of the Crew" (tm)
Pan-Imperia: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/Paul_Owensby/
Home of ValuJump Lines, Pan-Imperia Shipyards, and Beginnings for DOS.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 10:19:54 -0400
From: "Glenn Crawford" <glennc@nelvana.com>
Subject: Blowthrough

Quote the Action System:

Blowthrough.

The maximum damage done by melee weapons, slug throwers, laser, and
fragments is based on the mass of the target:

Mass        Maximum Damage
1-25kg         1D6
26-50kg        2D6
51-100kg       3D6
101-200kg      4D6

So it will, statistically speaking, require 4 blows from a battle axe to
kill a rabbit?

"and it has great Huuuuuuge fangs"

Please, lose the blowthrough rule. It is a nice idea but just does not seem
to work on the scale of the T4 combat system because, simply put, it IS
harder to kill a bear with a shotgun than it would be to kill a rabbit

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 09:17:15 -0500 (CDT)
From: lee@uansv2.Vanderbilt.Edu (Mike Lee)
Subject: TACS- some observations

Hey everyone-

        For what it's worth, Doug, I think this is a great combat system,
and I look forward to using it in my campaign.  I think you've done a really
good job of simulating the fluid (and sometimes chaotic) nature of combat
actions.  After reading over the system, I have a few observations that I
would like to suggest for consideration.

The Tactical Action Combat System, version 2.1

designed by Douglas E. Berry (dberry@hooked.net)

I. Introduction.

        <snip>

Feedback and suggestions are always welcome, and if Marc wants it, I woul=
d
be happy to have this system used in T4.1 for just the writing credit.

        Hear, hear!  I think that T4.1 would greatly benefit from using this
system, even as only an optional addendum to the combat rules.

        <major snippage of well-thought-out rules>

Initiative:

Whenever two or more combatants come into to conflict, or any situation
where it is important to determine who moves first, use the following tas=
k:

To gain initiative:
DEX or INT+(Applicable skill) < Average (2D6)
Opposed
APs may be spent to raise the target number
Combatant making roll by the greatest amount goes first.

Dexterity is used for all physical situations.  Intelligence can be used
for when the combatant is doing something that requires no physical actio=
n.
 When in doubt, use Dexterity.

        All of my experience in combat is in the areas of hand-to-hand and
melee, and with your background you may have a wealth of experience to
contradict me in terms of firefights, but it has been my observation that
intelligence (or sharp wits, if you prefer), not dexterity, is the prime
determining factor in combat initiative.  Combat encounters happen very,
very quickly, and the challenge for a combatant is to process a huge amount
of information about his surroundings, opponent's actions, etc., determine a
course of action, and then act upon it.  The reason why inexperienced people
sometimes "freeze up" in combat is due to information overload- the mind is
overwhelmed by the sudden deluge of information (and a healthy dose of
terror).  Thus, I suggest that INT+(applicable skill) be used as the sole
determinant of initiative.
       
        <more snippage of excellent rules>

Autofire is the use of weapons that fire multiple shots/pulses/pellets fo=
r
every task attempt.

The main use of auto fire is suppression fire.  In this role, the weapon =
is
fired as rapidly as possible (use the task for quick fire, above) into an
area to deny it to the enemy.

When using suppression fire, total the number of rounds fired into the
designated area (called the Beaten Zone).  Anyone entering this area duri=
ng
that turn has to roll D6 equal to the number of rounds.  Every 6 on the
dice indicates a hit by a random round.  Remove one die from the die pool
for every hit, then halve the pool for the remainder of the round.  Repea=
t
the process for every target that enters the Beaten Zone.  Because of the
extreme danger suppressive fire causes anyone attempting to enter the
Beaten Zone must succeed at the following task:

        I would suggest modifying this passage to "Because of the extreme
danger suppressive fire causes anyone attempting to enter or act within the
Beaten Zone must succeed at the following task:"  This is to cover
situations where someone lays down suppressing fire at enemy forces under
cover, attempting to keep the opponents' collective heads down and restrict
enemy return fire.  Does this make sense?

        <yet more snippage>

Shock and Surprise:

Whenever a combatant is shot at by a previously undetected opponent, he
loses 1D6 APs immediately.  He cannot take any actions until this loss oc=
curs.

If a group is ambushed, and is caught completely off-guard, all combatant=
s
on the surprised side are at half AP for the first round of combat.

Communication:

Referees should take care not to allow excess communication and planning
during combat.  Since each turn is only six seconds long, little more tha=
n
simple sentences should be allowed.  Any attempts at more detailed
communications should be charged AP, since those actions are occupying th=
e
combatant.

Combatants with hands-free radios, or those with prearranged codes, shoul=
d
be allowed a little more latitude.

        My only comments to this section are a hearty cheer of approval. :)

Morale:

Morale is a nebulous factor in role-playing games.  All too often,
non-player characters fight to the last individual against hopeless odds.

As a rule of thumb, most sane combatants will not stay when it is obvious
that they are completely out-gunned.  Also, if it is apparent that one si=
de
is losing, members of that side will tend to retreat.

        To muddy this issue slightly, there are situations where things
happen so fast that a group doesn't realize how many losses they have taken
until well after the fact.  (There's nothing quite like the feeling of being
amid a horde of your own troops in a field battle, rushing up to the enemy
and fighting away- and then realizing, moments later, that while you were
concentrating on killing the guy in front of you the rest of your force was
wiped out and you are now completely surrounded.)  I would suggest that the
GM make some sort of INT+Tactics (modified by AP) check for the enemy forces
at the end of each combat round to see how well they are assessing the
overall situation.  Some opponents might fight on because they don't grasp
that their situation has become untenable.

Mike Lee
Just typing to hear the keys click...

------------------------------

Date: 25 Aug 1997 10:32 EDT
From: "Robert Eaglestone" <eaglesto@nortel.ca>
Subject: Pocket Empires JavaScript

Howdy again,

I wrote a little JavaScript proglet to compute a lot of
the administratia in Pocket Empires.  It's 7.5k, so I
won't post it here;  however, since I don't have my own
web page anymore, where do y'all think it should go?

Is there a page out there that manages all the little
Traveller proglets out there?

Thanks,
Rob

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 11:22:18 -0400
From: "Glenn Crawford" <glennc@nelvana.com>
Subject: humour

> Why not a different number of dice based on the bulk of the target?
> Something like: for human sized targets, 4d; for smaller targets 2d; for
> larger targets 5d; for elephants and whales 6d; etc.

Sounds good to me.  Whatever you want, Eris. I'm game.

BLAM!

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 10:33:10 -0400
From: "Glenn Crawford" <glennc@nelvana.com>
Subject: Ling Logo

Roderich sayeth:
	In my universe Ling Standard's logo consists of 4 capital "L"'s,
all joined together at the end of the long stroke, at 90 degrees to one
another.

	Visualize it >:)

You may think it's a swastika, but it's not, see 

(get it not-see, nazi, ba-dum-tish)

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 10:28:36 -0400
From: "Glenn Crawford" <glennc@nelvana.com>
Subject: re: Cartoon Nostalgia

	Yup, I remember that one.  One of my fave cartoons ever done in a
TSR publications was one of those color strips in the back of Dragon
magazine, where they were expounding on the differences between fantasy and
SF rpgs, like where weapons come from ("Forged 10,000 years ago on the
battleground of Z'Blnith, this wand..."/"This blaster?  Sears.  23.95 on
sale.") and so forth.  Anyone remember it?

It was Phil Foglio's What's New, explaining the dif between fantasy and SF

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 10:49:32 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

In a message dated 97-08-25 05:26:12 EDT, you write:

<< 
 On a different subject, I don't know why Marc posted the objections on the
 list if he wasn't still open to making changes.  If it was just so he could
 attempt to counter objections, and the matter is actually settled, then he
 should have said that in the original post...it would have saved a lot of
 bandwidth. ;->  OTOH, if he *is* open to making changes, then perhaps he
 should be clearer about that too.  I'm preceiving mixed signals in his
 posts, and I don't know whether to just stop trying to convince him that
 changes are needed or continue. 
 
I posted because someone said that skills in T41 were 0-15 based, with an
average of 7. Since I never said that, I made a specific post that stated
what I perceived were the specific criticisms of task resolution so that I
could understand them and counter them (or adapt to them). 
 
I also stated that the task chapter draft was available to anyone by request.
I think people are dreaming if they think that the end result will be much
different from that draft. 
 
On the other hand, I have gotten a lot of insight by writing tasks to
accompany the skill chapter entries, and I have modified the task chapter
accordingly. 
 
Marc

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 10:57:00 -0400
From: Bill Prankard <BPRANKARD@theiia.org>
Subject: Re: Phil Foglio

>Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 08:23:13 -0400
>From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
>Subject: Re: Phil Foglio

>John MacPherson wrote:

>>
>>Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca> said:
>>>
>>>      Yup, I remember that one.  One of my fave cartoons ever done in a
>>> TSR publications was one of those color strips in the back of Dragon
>>> magazine, where they were expounding on the differences between fantasy 
and
>>> SF rpgs, like where weapons come from ("Forged 10,000 years ago on the
>>> battleground of Z'Blnith, this wand..."/"This blaster?  Sears.  23.95 on
>>> sale.") and so forth.  Anyone remember it?
>>
>>       YES!  It was a Phil Foglio and one of his absolute best!
>>


>        Do you remember any of the other panels?  I remember the one about
>what characters do when NPC's sell them a defective sundial/wristwatch; for
>the fantasy RPG's it was hold up the vendor at daggerpoint.  For the SF
>games it was blow up the planet.  Illustrated the difference in oomph
>available quite nicely...

Yes, I have the "What's New with Phil and Dixie" consolodated book, volume 
1.  I remeber this comic very well.  Letsee...

Oh yes, the diferences in 'power' beteween Fantasy and Sci Fi.  Ane panel 
shows a fantacy character holding an NPC at knifepoint and issueing a 
complaint about a watch.  The next panel shows a ship leaving an exploding 
planet with the comment of "Did you have to destroy the ENTIRE planet over 
one watch?" (I have KNOWN Trav players/munchkinites to do this!)

Another panel(the last one) shows a 'Barbarian' and a 'Spacer' in a bar. 
 They see something, the BArbarian says, "Trolls!"  the Spacer says 
"Mutants" this continues for about 3 exchanges untill the Spacer says "Maybe 
they are Mutant Trolls".  Then the bartender says "You guys are looking at 
the mirror again!"

I remember one about "Exercises for gamers"
1. put cinder blocks all over your body, this refelects how heavy most 
armour is.
2. put pots and pans all over you, and try to sneek past the neighbors dog, 
this is about how it is like to sneek past a monster in full armour.
3. Extra Credit -- Strap 20 Cats to you and take a cold shower, this is 
about how much dammage one recieves in an average round of combat!

Trying to come up with some Traveller flavored ones...
1.  Hump head first in a lava pit.  This is about how it feels to be hit 
with a PGMP-15!
2.  Try using a TRS-80 Computer to calculate theoretical physics.  This is 
what it feels like to be an astrogator on a starship(Classic Trav)

Any others? :)

Commander X


>Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1745
***********************************
Traveller-digest      Monday, August 25 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1746



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

RE: Binders and other Trivia
Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations
Re: M21 - Shipsizes
Re: Updated CSC
Re: Little black books (was RE: Binders and other Trivia)
Re:Solomani TL15 Worlds
TL F IN SR
Whoops, sorry.
TACS pt1 (second try)
Second try at TACS
Damage System GC1.0
Task List for TACS (second try)
TACS pt4 (second try)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 10:38:59 -0400
From: "Allen L. Hubbard" <us004073@mindspring.com>
Subject: RE: Binders and other Trivia

- ------ =_NextPart_000_01BCB149.72453B40
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

My two-cents worth on the issue:

I love the 3-ring binder approach.  I currently take my materials and =
photocopy them, and put them into a binder.  I can mark up, move, =
insert, change, etc., whatever I want, and I avoid the dog-eared, torn =
rulebook problem.

I like the ASL approach, where each game module comes with inserts and =
updated chapters, errata, etc.  Traveller does cry out for this kind of =
approach.  Whether it comes that way, or I have to do it myself.

Al Hubbard
Grand Blanc, MI



- ------ =_NextPart_000_01BCB149.72453B40
Content-Type: application/ms-tnef
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
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- ------ =_NextPart_000_01BCB149.72453B40--

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 11:58:13 -0400 (EDT)
From: SemoFetus@aol.com
Subject: Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations

>Why a dead end? Develop it. One or more of your trade organizations has
>people on planet trying to obtain rights to develop a port there. Develop
>the port without the locals input; select an isolated area near a body of
>water and have a trade organization, a consortium of organizations, or even
>a aggressive individual initiate a port & refueling operation. 

>Does your view of the Imperium have an organization that 'protects'
>undeveloped worlds? If not, then the economic engine will drive over the low
>tech world with what ever is needed to provide a low cost path over which
>trade will flow. 

I'm still deciding on whether or not to have the IISS interdict the world or
not.  If they do, then no starport, and no fueling, and half of a perfectly
good jump-1 trade route goes out the window.

On the other hand, I have the possibility of making a deep-space starport
which connects both "mains".  I'd like to figure out prices so I can analyze
the cost effectiveness of the whole situation...

Semo

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 23:43:36 +1200
From: Andrew Moffatt-Vallance <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Re: M21 - Shipsizes

>Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 21:53:17 +0000 ()
>From: kraehe@bakunin.hb.north.de (Michael Koehne)
>Subject: Re: M21 - Shipsizes

>Moin Leroy William Lu Guatney,

>> In my coverless edition, it says (excerpted, and re-formated on purpose):

>	many thanks, just stored it ;-)

>> Just for clarity, _the_ maximum size for a TL9 ship, Terran or not, is
>> 4,999 tons.  With my own house rule, I drop that to 4,900 tons but that
>> either value still does not allow for Terrans to mount Spinal mounts.

>	Spinal mounts are not limited to > 5000dt, if you are using
>	FFS for design. EG: My Gus600 Liner has four 25Mj meson
>	accellerators. They are 60 meters long, needle thin, have a
>	weight of only 46 metric tons and release 25 points of damage
>	in close combats.

>	Ok they are Tl13, but just an other design for a tl9/4999er.

>	This ship could mount 120 meter spinal mount weapons. Using
>	a 400 Mj PA with a bore of 5.7m, will produce 10:100-80-40-20,
>	( or 10:3-3-2-1 BR, 4-4-3-2 T4 ) for only 230 displacement tons.
>	4 of them plus a large fighter bay, and some missile bays will
>	show a capable warship.

This is true under FF&S2 and SSDS. However Leroy and I are disussing in terms
of the arcane design system known as High Guard used in CT. Under High Guard
you simply can not fit a spinal mount into a >5000T hull at TL 9 (nor can you
fit more than one spinal mount into any ship). Why are Leroy and I discussing
such an ancient design system? 'Cos it's fun :*) and a few people do still use
it. I'm not up to speed with either FF&S2 or SSDS, so I haven't attempted to
design any Early Terran warships which are compatable with T4, but they would
be interesting to see (hint, hint to all those people who are up to speed with
FF&S and SSDS).

  Andrew etc.
    a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz

****************************************************************************
The longest distance between two points is with children.
****************************************************************************

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 17:35:01 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: Updated CSC

Doug wrote:

>At 12:07 AM 8/24/97 GMT, you wrote:
>>I've just uploaded a new version of CSC (was v1.0.1b, is now v1.0.2b).
>
>and this would be found at...?

http://www.interlog.com/~dmci104/GamingClub/Traveller/software.html

NB Rob's stuff is all MacOS not Windows.

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"Omnia Mutantur Nihil Interit"  -  Sandman 'The Wake'
"Everything Changes, but nothing is truly lost" 

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 17:26:46 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: Little black books (was RE: Binders and other Trivia)

Douglas wrote:

>The first thing I did with FFS2 was take it down to Kinko's and have the
>binding cut off.  Then I put everything into page protectors and shoved the
>whole shebang into a binder.
>
>With a book that that, the binder format makes a great deal of sense, since
>it needs to lie flat and put up with a great deal of page flipping.  It
>also helps protect the pages from coke spills, and I can take the tables I
>need out of the back and have them for easy reference.

Funnily enough, that is the same thing that I did with the Babylon Project,
and what I intend to do to FFS2 (when it reaches the UK :-( ) and the T4.1
softcover.

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"Omnia Mutantur Nihil Interit"  -  Sandman 'The Wake'
"Everything Changes, but nothing is truly lost" 

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 17:29:48 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re:Solomani TL15 Worlds

David Smart wrote:
>Harold Hale wrote:
>>
>> >Actually there are. Scandia Subsector (home to the Cymbeline system) has
>> >4.
>>
>>    Better recheck your map.  All the worlds in that subsector are
>> **Imperial** property in 1107.
>
>SD Mooney added:
>
>> >Actually there are. Scandia Subsector (home to the Cymbeline system) has
>> >4.
>>
>> Erm. Wrong methinks.
>>
>> Supplement 10 describes the *Arcturus* Subsector (home to the Cymbeline
>> system). This does have 4 TL15 worlds, but *all* the worlds in the
>> subsector are in the *Third Imperium*, not the Solomani Confederation. The
>> thick black line at the bottom is the border <g>. Not sure how they mark
>> that in space....
>>
>> The S10 copy I have has no worlds >TL14.
>
>Well, we'll just see about this! (flip, flip, flip) Let's
>see now...
>Oh...er...uh...I was, uh, tired and, um, had just finished
>a 6-pack of Scout brew...
>
>To convince TMLrs of last post's validity
>Formidable, Persuasion skill (fateful)


Let me guess - you'll return to this later when you've gathered the
evidence? <grin> :-)

Dom!

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"Omnia Mutantur Nihil Interit"  -  Sandman 'The Wake'
"Everything Changes, but nothing is truly lost" 

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 13:08:42 -0400
From: "Glenn Crawford" <glennc@nelvana.com>
Subject: TL F IN SR

>Actually there are. Scandia Subsector (home to the Cymbeline system) has
>4.

> Better recheck your map.  All the worlds in that subsector are
> **Imperial** property in 1107.

Believe what you want, Imperial running dog, lackey to aliens

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 11:54:19 -0400
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: Whoops, sorry.

	For some strange reason that's probably my fault my mail reader
addressed a message to Rob to the list instead.  I apologize for any and
all chaos, confusion, and hard drives exploding out the front of your
machines and landing in your laps smoking like pieces of burnt toast.

Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 10:48:40 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: TACS pt1 (second try)

The Tactical Action Combat System

I. Introduction.

The TACS is a combat system for Traveller that emphasizes the
action/reaction cycle found in real-world combat.  Using this system makes
the characters consider their actions carefully, and use caution and care
when in deadly situations; something that, in my opinion, is sadly lacking
from most RPG systems.

This system is designed for Traveller 4.1.  The tasks described use the
system developed by Marc Miller and distributed to members of the Traveller
Mailing List.  Whenever possible, I have held as close to the published 4th
edition rules as possible.

Feedback and suggestions are always welcome, and if Marc wants it, I would
be happy to have this system used in T4.1 for just the writing credit.

II. Basic Overview.

In TACS, each combatant has a pool of Action Points (AP).  These are spent
to perform all actions and tasks such as moving or firing.  APs may be lost
due to wounding or being surprised.  Players may spend APs to improve their
Target Numbers on certain combat related tasks.  

Action Points.

Each combatant in TACS has an Action Point pool (abbreviated AP).  This is
the sum of DEX+INT+Tactics Skill.  APs are regained after each combat
round, and unspent APs do not carry over into the next combat round.  APs
may not be transferred between combatants.

All actions cost APs; there are NO free actions.

Wounds that affect DEX do affect APs in later rounds, in addition to the AP
penalty for being wounded.  (See Injuries and Effects below.)  When a
combatant loses DEX or INT for whatever reason, APs need to be recalculated
based on the new level.

APs and Tasks.

Action Points may be applied to certain tasks as a positive modifier to the
task number.  The most common use of this is the Initiative task (to get
the first shot/action in a confrontation) and the To Hit task (to increase
chances of hitting)

The use of APs on an allowed task must be declared before the dice are rolled.

Only tasks that state specifically that AP use is allowed can be modified
in this manner.

Combatant Turn Sequence.

Once the Referee has determined that a combat has begun, all combatants
determine their starting positions and AP totals.  Combat then follows the
following flow:

1. AP Phase.     All combatants regenerate their AP pools.  Re-figure AP pools
                 as necessary.
2 Action Phase:  Starting with the combatant with the lowest AP total, all 
                 combatants perform their desired actions for the turn.
3. Update Phase: When all combatants have expended all APs, or all those with 
                 AP remaining pass, the turn is over.  Determine the effects
                 of wounds and long term actions.  Note the end of the turn.

Long Term Actions

Combatants will need to undertake actions that will take longer than 6
seconds to complete.  An example would be an attempt to pick a lock, or
repair a console.  In these cases, the player should declare that he is
engaged in a Long Term Action (LTA).

While doing a LTA, the character retains his APs, but cannot spend them on
anything other than the task at hand without a penalty to the LTA.  A
character trying to calculate jump entry will have trouble concentrating if
he stops every few seconds to return fire.

Referees should set an AP cost per turn for LTAs based on the level of
concentration necessary to perform the action.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 10:49:57 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Second try at TACS

Looks like the list server choked on the first attempt to send TACs as a
single file.. It should now appear as 5 parts.
- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 14:00:42 -0400
From: "Glenn Crawford" <glennc@nelvana.com>
Subject: Damage System GC1.0

2D6 + DV
x 1.5 DV at Short Range (round down if DV 2+)
x 1 DV at Medium, Long Range
x  0.5 DV at Extreme Range (round down)
Head Hit: On any odd roll on 2D6, roll +1D6
																												Megatraveller
Level	No											Difficulty Increase	
Scratch	3+							+1 Die Modifier
Slight	7+										+2 Die Modifier
Serious	11+				+1 Difficulty Level
Critical	15+						+2 Difficulty Level

Avoid Being Knocked Unconcious: Simple, Strength
Arms, Lower Legs, Hands and Feet 	- 1 Difficulty Level
Head		+1 Difficulty Level	

Thus to avoid unconciousness for Joe Average (STR 7) by a hit to the leg at
serious level of damage would be 6+ (simple task, +1 dif, DM for STR +1). A
critical hit to the head is Formidable (15+) so it requires a VERY (STR 15+)
strong character to stay standing

Optional:
For Difficulty Increase, all tasks involving the injured location are made
more difficult by the listed amount. This initial shock wears off after
3D6-(Strength/5 + Endurance/5) minutes. At this point the penalty drops by
one wound category.

In addition to causing penalties to the area hit, all areas subordinate to
that area are also affected. 
Area				Subordinate
Head, Chest, Abdomen	All
Arms				Hands
Upper Legs			Lower Legs, Feet
Lower Legs			Feet

Survival:
Light wound to head: simple, END (of victim), medical
Serious wound to head: routine, END (of victim), medical
Serious wound to abdomen: simple, END (of victim), medical
Serious wound to chest: simple, END (of victim), medical
Critical wound to head: difficult, END (of victim), medical
Critical wound to abdomen: routine, END (of victim), medical
Critical wound to chest: difficult, END (of victim), medical
If you pass this test, roll a further check at the next crisis point at one
level easier

Crisis points:
Light		60 minutes/1 day/1 week
Serious 30 minutes/1 hour/1 day
Critical 15 minutes/30 minutes/1 hour/8 hours/1 day

All Serious wounds go up one level if not treated within one hour
All Critical Wounds go up one level if not treated in 10 minutes, and up two
levels if not treated within one hour

I am designing this system with the help of a friend who is a trauma aid
technician.
Coming soon, BLEEDING Rules

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 10:51:28 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Task List for TACS (second try)

Task list for TACS.
To make things easier, here are all the tasks specific to TASC.

To increase speed by sprinting:
STR+Athletics, Difficult (2.5d)
On success, speed is 2m for 2AP
Spectacular Success gives 4m per 2AP
Spectacular Failure results in a pulled muscle (1 point damage to STR, AP
costs for walking double for duration of combat)
This task may be attempted in consecutive turns by increasing the
difficulty by one level each turn.

To vault a low obstruction:
Dex+Athletics  Average (2d)
Moving more than 3m before this task makes the task Easy.

To vault a high obstruction:
Dex+Athletics  Difficult (2.5d)
Moving more than 3m before this task makes the task Average.

To gain initiative:
DEX or INT+(Applicable skill) > Average (2D6)
Opposed
APs may be spent to raise the target number
Combatant making roll by the greatest amount goes first.

To hit in melee:
Dex+Brawling or Weapon skill > Average (2D6)
Requires an AP expenditure (4AP)
AP may be spent to raise target number

To block a melee attack:
Dex+Brawling or Weapon skill > Difficult (2.5D6)
Requires an AP expenditure (6AP)
AP may be spent to raise target number
Block must be declared before attacker rolls the to hit task.

To dodge a melee attack:
Dex+Athletics > Difficult (2.5D6)
Requires an AP expenditure (6AP)
AP may be spent to raise target number
Dodge must be declared before attacker rolls the to hit task.

To grapple an opponent:
STR+Brawling > Difficult (2.5D6)
Opposed
Requires an AP expenditure (8AP)
AP may be spent to raise target number
Up to three attackers may team up against a single defender.

To escape a grappling hold:
Dex+Brawling > Formidable (3D6)
Success removes all Control Points on the combatant
Spectacular Success allows a free melee attack on the opponent
Spectacular Failure doubles the current Control Points on the combatant

To gain control of a loose item in melee:
DEX+Atheletics > Formidable (3D6)
Opposed
Requires an AP expenditure (8 AP)
AP may be spent to raise target number
If both succeed, best success gains control

To hit with a ranged weapon:
STR+Weapon Skill > Range Difficulty
Requires an AP expenditure (4 AP)
AP may be spent to raise target number

Range Difficulties:
  Range     meters      Task Level
 Contact      0-3         Easy
Very Short    4-15       Average
  Short      16-45      Difficult
 Medium      46-150     Formidable
  Long       151-400    Staggering
Very Long   451-1500    Impossible
 Distant      1500+      Hopeless

To enter a Beaten Zone:
INT+Tactics > Staggering (4D6)
Spectacular Failure results in the combatant losing all APs for two turns.

To hit with a thrown weapon:
DEX+Throwing > Range Difficulty
Requires an AP expenditure (cost depends on weight)
AP may be spent to increase target number
If task fails, check deviation

To remain conscious with a minor wound
STR+END > Difficult (2.5D6)
This task must be attempted at the beginning of each turn.

To remain conscious with a serious wound
STR+END > Staggering (4D6)
This task must be attempted for every action taken

To speed healing of wounds
INT+Medical > Staggering (4D6)
Access to hospital facilities makes this task Difficult (2.5D6)
The task must be attempted for each day of healing.
Success results in a healing rate increase based on the tech level of the
doctor
Spectacular Success doubles the normal rate for the TL
Spectacular Failure causes 2D6 wounds.

Tech Level   Speed of Healing
  0-3          2pts/day
  4-5          3pts/day
  6-7          4pts/day
  8-11         5pts/day
 12-13         6pts/day
 14-15         7pts/day

To clear a malfunctioning weapon
DEX+Weapon Skill > Average (2D6)
Requires an AP expenditure (10AP)
AP may be spent to raise target number

To maintain stability while firing in 0-g
DEX+Environment Combat > Formidable (3D6)
Failure results in the combatant losing orientation
Spectacular Failure results in the loss of APs for the next turn

To move in 0-g
DEX+Environment Combat or Vacc Suit > Average (2D6)
Success puts the combatant within 1 meter of her aiming point.
Speed is 10 meters per turn

To apply an emergency patch to a suit
DEX+Vacc Suit > Difficult (2.5D6)
Requires an AP expenditure (4AP)

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 10:48:52 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: TACS pt4 (second try)

V. Injuries and Effects

Damage and Penetration.

When a hit has been achieved, compare the damage of the weapon used with
the armor rating (if any) of the target.

If Damage is greater than the Armor, the difference between Damage and
Armor is rolled to determine damage done to the target.

Example:  A weapon doing Damage 4 hits a target wearing Armor 3.  1D6 is
rolled for actual damage to the target.

Increased Damage.

Any to hit roll that succeeds by 5 or more results in damage being doubled
after penetration.

Any to hit roll made by 9 or more results in damage being tripled after
penetration.

This multiplication is made after damage is rolled.

Example:  Making his to hit roll by ten, Dave now rolls damage.  His rifle
has a damage of 4, and the Vargr Corsair was wearing Armor 2.  Dave rolls
two dice and gets a 6.  This is tripled, resulting in the unfortunate Vargr
taking 18 points of damage.  Bad doggie!

Flexible Armor.

When armor listed as flexible stops damage, 1 point of damage for every die
stopped is applied to the target.

Blowthrough.

The maximum damage done by melee weapons, slug throwers, laser, and
fragments is based on the mass of the target:

Mass        Maximum Damage
1-25kg         1D6
26-50kg        2D6
51-100kg       3D6
101-200kg      4D6

Plasma/Fusion weapons and explosions are exempt from the Blowthrough rule.

Applying Damage.

Once a hit has been achieved, and the total damage has been rolled, damage
is applied to the targets' statistics.  Damage is applied to the three
physical characteristics (STR, DEX, END) by the target player.  Each die of
damage is applied against a separate characteristic.

Exception:  The first wound received by a combatant is applied against a
single characteristic (determined randomly).  If this damage exceeds the
affected characteristic, excess damage is applied to the remaining two
stats randomly.

There are four levels of wounds:

SUPERFICIAL (No characteristics lowered to 0)

Characters taking a superficial wound immediately lose 5AP, or all
remaining AP if less than 5 AP are available.

Combatants with superficial wounds will lose an additional point of damage
every 10 minutes without treatment.  Treatment is an Easy First Aid task,
and the wounded combatant may perform this task himself.

MINOR (One characteristic lowered to 0)

The combatant immediately loses 10AP.
The combatant must succeed at the following task to remain conscious:

To remain conscious with a minor wound
STR+END < Difficult (2.5D6)
This task must be attempted at the beginning of each turn.

Combatants with minor wounds will lose an additional point of damage every
5 minutes without treatment.  Treatment is an Average First Aid task.

SERIOUS (Two characteristics lowered to 0)

The combatant loses all AP for the turn
The combatant must succeed at the following task to stay conscious:

To remain conscious with a serious wound
STR+END < Staggering (4D6)
This task must be attempted for every action taken

Seriously wounded characters cannot Sprint.

Combatants with serious wounds will lose an additional point of damage
every 10 turns without treatment.  Treatment is a Difficult First Aid task.

GRAVE (Three characteristics lowered to 0)

The combatant is unconscious.

The combatant will lose an additional point of damage every 5 turns without
treatment.  Treatment is a Formidable First Aid task.

In all cases above, the treatment mentioned is just enough to stabilize the
combatant to prevent wounds from getting any worse.

Death.

Combatants are considered dead when they have taken 10 points of damage
beyond Grave wounds status.  This can be from any source, including excess
damage from the attack that lowered the combatant to Grave status.

Stun Damage.

Certain weapons are listed as doing stun damage.  These attacks are
resolved as normal, except that they do not result in death, and recovery
is much quicker than normal.  Each weapon description will include
specifics on the stun mechanism.

Recovery.

Characters heal at a base rate of 1 characteristic point per day.  This
assumes no treatment beyond bed rest.  To speed healing is a task.

To speed healing of wounds
INT+Medical < Staggering (4D6)
Access to hospital facilities makes this task Difficult (2.5D6)
The task must be attempted for each day of healing.
Success results in a healing rate increase based on the tech level of the
doctor
Spectacular Success doubles the normal rate for the TL
Spectacular Failure causes 2D6 wounds.

Tech Level   Speed of Healing
  0-3          2pts/day
  4-5          3pts/day
  6-7          4pts/day
  8-11         5pts/day
 12-13         6pts/day
 14-15         7pts/day

Conditions such as infection, impairment, etc., are left to the Referee's
discretion.

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1746
***********************************
Traveller-digest      Monday, August 25 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1747



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

TACS pt2 (second try)
TACS pt5 (second try)
TACS pt3 (second try)
TL of Terra/Solomani in the Rim War (summary for those tired of it)
Beginnings 0.95beta Buglet...
Re: RoM/Terran TL
Re: Task Resolution
Re: RoM/Terra TL (Occam)
CSC Bug Fix Uploaded

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 10:48:43 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: TACS pt2 (second try)

III. Movement

Basics.

TACS uses a 6 second turn.  For ease in converting to different scales, all
movement rules are given in one-meter increments.

The basic cost for a human to move over good terrain is 2AP per meter.  See
the Consolidated Action Point List for a complete list of AP costs for
movement.

Sprinting.

On occasion, a combatant may feel the need to cover a great deal of ground
quickly.  In this case, he needs to sprint.

Sprinting requires the expenditure of all the combatant's APs on movement.
The sprinter cannot perform any other actions during the sprint.  He is
sacrificing everything in a mad dash.  (Exception: at any point during
movement, the sprinter may go prone.)

At the point the sprint is declared, roll the following task:

To increase speed by sprinting
STR+Athletics < Difficult (2.5d)
On success speed is 2m for 2AP
Spectacular Success gives 4m per 2AP
Spectacular Failure results in a pulled muscle (1 point damage to STR, AP
costs for walking double for duration of combat)
This task may be attempted in consecutive turns by increasing the
difficulty by one level each turn.

No matter the result of the task, the player is committed to the sprint
attempt.  When the character finishes sprinting, he is at half his normal
AP level for a number of turns equal to the number of turns spent sprinting.

Crawling.

Many times in combat, it is wise to remain as close to the ground as is
possible.  This is accomplished by crawling.

Crawling costs 4AP per meter.  While crawling, all tasks using the hands
are increased by one difficulty level.

Climbing/Jumping.

Combatants can climb relatively easy verticals (trees, ladders) for 4AP per
meter ascended/descended.  Climbing more difficult slopes require a skill
roll, and may be slower (referee's discretion).

Combatants may vault over low objects (1 meter or less) with little
difficulty.

To vault a low obstruction
Dex+Athletics < Average (2d)
Moving more than 3m before this task makes the task Easy.

To vault a high obstruction
Dex+Athletics < Difficult (2.5d)
Moving more than 3m before this task makes the task Average.

Unencumbered combatants my make a running broad jump equal to their
Strength+Athletics in meters.  This requires at least 3m of starting space.
 PC/NPCs may make a standing broad jump equal to a third of the running
broad jump distance.  Combatants may make a vertical jump equal to their
Strength x10 in centimeters.  Jumping into/out of congested areas, loose
footing, etc. may call for an athletics task.

Combatants may be required to jump from a high place.  Heights of less than
2m use the low vault task above.  Increase the difficulty by one level for
each meter of height.  Failure in this task results in the jumper taking
damage dice equal to half the distance in meters.  Spectacular Failure
gives damage dice equal to the distance in meters.

Going Prone.

Combatants may go prone for 1AP.  It is important to stress that this AP
cost must be paid; there is no free action if you are caught in the open
with no AP.  The best you can hope for is that a friend with AP tackles you.

When a combatant goes prone, she may specify that she is going to her
knees, falling into a sitting position, or any reasonable description.
Going prone into an adjacent ditch is fine, into the driver's seat of a
tank is not.

A common use of the maneuver is in conjunction with a 1 meter move to a
covered position.

Standing up takes 10AP.  If a combatant wishes, he may first go to his
knees for 5AP in one turn, and finish paying the additional 5AP (and finish
standing) in the following turn.

Stairs and Elevators.

Stairs may be climbed or descended at a cost of +4/+3AP in addition to the
cost of the horizontal distance covered.  This covers one flight of stairs
(approx. 3m height difference.)

Calling an elevator is a 3AP action.  Elevators will arrive in 1d6 turns
per 10 floors served.  This can be divided by the number of elevators in
service.

Obstructions and Doorways.

Combatants will often be called on to move through areas that are filled
with inconvenient obstacles.  TACS deals with such problems simply.

Cluttered terrain (light underbrush, office furniture, light debris):
Moving through an area defined as cluttered doubles all AP costs for movement.

Very Cluttered terrain (heavy brush or hedgerow, full storage area, heavy
debris):  Moving through an area defined as very cluttered triples all AP
costs for movement.

Stealth Skill.

If a combatant wishes to use Stealth, all costs for movement are doubled.
After movement, check the Stealth task to see if the combatant was
successful.  Costs for Stealth are cumulative with penalties for cluttered
areas.

It is impossible to remain stealthy while sprinting.

Opening Doors.

Operating a doorway takes AP.  See the Consolidated Action Point list for
the details.  The door way/hatch opens at the beginning of the next turn.
(Exception: If the combatant ended the previous turn next to the doorway,
and her first action is to open the door, referee's discretion on letting
the door open during the turn.)

Airlocks take 15 turns to completely cycle if there is a pressure difference.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 10:48:58 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: TACS pt5 (second try)

VI Other Considerations.

Shock and Surprise:

Whenever a combatant is shot at by a previously undetected opponent, he
loses 1D6 APs immediately.  He cannot take any actions until this loss occurs.

If a group is ambushed, and is caught completely off-guard, all combatants
on the surprised side are at half AP for the first round of combat.

Communication:

Referees should take care not to allow excess communication and planning
during combat.  Since each turn is only six seconds long, little more than
simple sentences should be allowed.  Any attempts at more detailed
communications should be charged AP, since those actions are occupying the
combatant.

Combatants with hands-free radios, or those with prearranged codes, should
be allowed a little more latitude.

Battle Dress:

Combatants using Battle Dress use the suit's characteristics for tasks.

Visibility:

Combats taking place in dimly lit conditions have the difficulty of all
tasks raised by one level.  In complete darkness, the tasks are three
levels higher.

Combatants using vision enhancement equipment only suffer these penalties
when trying to climb or jump.

Races with natural night vision do not suffer from the penalty for dimly
lit areas.

Telescopic Sights.

Sights are rated for magnification.  When a weapon equipped with telescopic
sights is fired from a braced position, divide the range to the target (in
meters) by the magnification of the sight for to hit purposes only.  Using
a telescopic sight requires spending 4AP, which does not count as extra AP
for aiming.

Laser Sights.

Laser sights may be mounted on any weapon.  For 2AP, they provide a +4 to
the to hit task number.  Laser sights are ineffective beyond Short range,
and may not be visible under bright lighting conditions.

Weapons equipped with both laser and telescopic sights may use the laser
bonus if the perceived aiming range is Short or less.

Weapon Reliability:

Whenever a Spectacular Failure is rolled when a firearm the Referee should
determine if the weapon has malfunctioned (jammed, lost power, etc.)
Performing immediate action to fix the problem uses the following task

To clear a malfunctioning weapon
DEX+Weapon Skill < Average (2D6)
Requires an AP expenditure (10AP)
AP may be spent to raise target number

Encumbrance:

Combatants can normally carry up to their STR in kg without incurring any
penalties.  They may carry up to twice their STR at a penalty of increasing
all tasks by one difficulty level.

Different Environments:

Gravity.

To best simulate the effects of different planetary gravity, multiply the
weight of all items by the local gravity.  This includes the weight of the
character.  This affects the amount of equipment that the character may
carry along with the distance that the character may jump.

Zero-gravity.

Operating in a micro or zero gravity environment can be the most
challenging combat environment for Traveller.

To maintain stability while firing in 0-g
DEX+Environment Combat < Formidable (3D6)
Failure results in the combatant losing orientation
Spectacular Failure results in the loss of APs for the next turn

Movement in zero-g is done by pushing off walls and floating.

To move in 0-g
DEX+Environment Combat or Vacc Suit < Average (2D6)
Requires an AP expenditure (4AP)
Success puts the combatant within 1 meter of her aiming point.
Speed is 10 meters per turn

Vacuum and Hostile Environments

The main danger in combat in a hostile atmosphere is the threat of a
punctured protective suit.  Whenever a combatant's suit is punctured (the
Armor rating is exceeded by an attack), the combatant has to patch the suit
quickly.

To apply an emergency patch to a suit
DEX+Vacc Suit < Difficult (2.5D6)
Requires an AP expenditure (4AP)

Almost all Vacc Suits come equipped with emergency patches.

Each turn that the character is exposed to vacuum, he takes 1D6 damage.
Armor does not protect against this damage.  After all three physical
characteristics are reduced to zero, apply additional damage to INT.  Any
damage to INT is permanent.

If the combat is taking place in a Corrosive or Insidious atmosphere, the
Referee must determine the effects of exposure to the gasses present.

Explosives:

Explosions are rated for their concussion damage.  Damage from explosions
attenuates quickly over distances.  Use the listed damage at Contact Range.
 Quarter the damage for each range band beyond Contact.  Combatants
directly in contact with the explosive take double damage.

Concussive explosions are exempt to the Blowthrough rule.

Constant Damage:

Attacks like poison, acid, etc., do damage each turn.  During the upkeep
potion of each turn, apply the appropriate amount of damage to the victim.
If this results in a change of wound status, immediately roll any required
tasks to see if the combatant remains conscious.

Example:  A combatant has been bitten by a poisonous vermin.  He takes 2
points of damage each turn during the upkeep phase.  This results in him
going to the Minor wound category after a few turns.  He must immediately
roll to see if he remains conscious.

Most poisons will be of limited duration.

Morale:

Morale is a nebulous factor in role-playing games.  All too often,
non-player characters fight to the last individual against hopeless odds.

As a rule of thumb, most sane combatants will not stay when it is obvious
that they are completely out-gunned.  Also, if it is apparent that one side
is losing, members of that side will tend to retreat.

Members of organized military or police units will have much better morale
than random groups of thugs.  A good clue for the observant players is how
determined their opponents seem to be.

The morale of the characters is in the hands of the players.  If they wish
to face down the Imperial Marines with a body pistol, it's their funeral.

- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 10:48:48 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: TACS pt3 (second try)

IV.  Combat

There are three basic questions that need to be addressed in the combat
segment.  Who goes first?  Do I hit?  How much damage did I do?

Initiative:

Whenever two or more combatants come into to conflict, or any situation
where it is important to determine who moves first, use the following task:

To gain initiative:
DEX or INT+(Applicable skill) < Average (2D6)
Opposed
APs may be spent to raise the target number
Combatant making roll by the greatest amount goes first.

Dexterity is used for all physical situations.  Intelligence can be used
for when the combatant is doing something that requires no physical action.
 When in doubt, use Dexterity.

The appropriate skill is dependent on what the combatant is attempting to
do.  Almost any skill may be used with referee's approval.

If a combatant decides to spend AP to raise her target number, the decision
and amount of APs to be spent must be declared prior to rolling the task.

Example:  Slick Mike is about to be shot by a guard.  Thinking quickly, he
tries to talk his way out of the situation.  He rolls his INT (11) plus
Fast Talk-3 vs. the Guard's DEX (7) plus Pistol-2.  The guard chooses to
spend two APs to raise his target number from 9 to 11.  Mike makes his roll
by 6, the guard by 3.  Slick Mike has the chance to turn on the charm
before the guard can pull the trigger.

If two or more combatants tie, their actions are considered to happen in
order from the lowest AP cost to the highest.  The tied combatants write
down what their next action will be, including any optional AP
expenditures.  These actions cannot be aborted voluntarily.  If two or more
combatant choose actions with identical AP costs, those actions happen
simultaneously.

Melee Combat:

Melee Combat covers brawling and combat with hand-to-hand weapons.  The
basic to-hit task in melee is:

To hit in melee:
Dex+Brawling or Weapon skill < Average (2D6)
Requires an AP expenditure (4AP)
AP may be spent to raise target number

An attacker in melee may spend extra AP to increase the damage done.  This
adds one point of damage for every 2 AP spent, and increases the difficulty
of the to hit task to Difficult (2.5D6)

The target may attempt to block the attack using the following task:

To block a melee attack:
Dex+Brawling or Weapon skill < Difficult (2.5D6)
Requires an AP expenditure (6AP)
AP may be spent to raise target number
Block must be declared before attacker rolls the to hit task.

The target may also dodge:

To dodge a melee attack:
Dex+Athletics < Difficult (2.5D6)
Requires an AP expenditure (6AP)
AP may be spent to raise target number
Dodge must be declared before attacker rolls the to hit task.

When a melee attack is made, the attacker declares the target, what he is
attacking with, and any extra AP spent.  The target may declare her
defense, and any extra AP spent.  Both combatants then roll the appropriate
tasks.  There are four possible results:

Attacker succeeds, Defender succeeds: The blow misses (dodge) or is blocked
Attacker succeeds, Defender fails:    The blow lands, check for damage
Attacker fails, Defender succeeds:    The blow misses, Defender may react
Attacker fails, Defender fails:       The blow misses

The Referee should enforce the results of Spectacular Successes/Failures
depending upon the tactical situation.

Grappling:

Combatants will want to wrestle opponents to the ground and gain control of
them without resorting to lethal force.  In these cases, use the following
system:

To grapple an opponent:
STR+Brawling < Difficult (2.5D6)
Opposed
Requires an AP expenditure (8AP)
AP may be spent to raise target number
Up to three attackers may team up against a single defender.

Each combatant rolls the task, and notes the amount by which she made her
roll.  The combatant with the roll furthest below her target number has
established a hold on her opponent.  The difference between the Attacker's
total (Target number-roll) and the Defender's total is used as Control
Points on the Defender.  When the total Control Points on a target equals
his STR, he is controlled, and is unable to spend any AP or attempt any
tasks except for Escape (see below).

It is possible for two combatants to have Control Points on each other.
This will persist until one has achieved control, or the combatants are
separated.

Control Points are carried over from turn to turn.  Control Points persist
until either the attacker moves away from the defender, the combatant that
has the Control points on a character is herself controlled, or the
Defender successfully performs an escape:

To escape a grappling hold:
Dex+Brawling < Formidable (3D6)
Success removes all Control Points on the combatant
Spectacular Success allows a free melee attack on the opponent
Spectacular Failure doubles the current Control Points on the combatant

Grabbing Items.

Opponents in melee may be in situations where they are both attempting to
get a hold of the same item.  Use the following task:

To gain control of a loose item in melee:
DEX+Atheletics < Formidable (3D6)
Opposed
Requires an AP expenditure (8 AP)
AP may be spent to raise target number
If both succeed, best success gains control

Ranged Combat:

Ranged combat is any combat that takes place beyond arms' length.

To hit procedure.

All ranged weapons use the same to hit task:

To hit with a ranged weapon:
STR+Weapon Skill < Range Difficulty
Requires an AP expenditure (4 AP)
AP may be spent to raise target number

Range Difficulties:
  Range     meters      Task Level
 Contact      0-3         Easy
Very Short    4-15       Average
  Short      16-45      Difficult
 Medium      46-150     Formidable
  Long       151-400    Staggering
Very Long   451-1500    Impossible
 Distant      1500+      Hopeless

Range and Aiming AP:

AP may be spent to increase the target number of the to hit task, with a
few limitations.  AP spent on the to-hit task increase the target number by
one for every AP spent out to the effective range of the weapon.  Beyond
that range, every 3AP raises the target number by one.

Example:  Arod is firing a pistol with a range of Short.  His target is 25
meters away (Short range).  If he spends AP to increase his to hit chances,
each AP will increase his target number by one.  Arod switches to a target
60 meters down range (Medium range) Arod now has to spend 3AP  for each one
point improvement in the target number, due to the inherent inaccuracy of
the pistol.

To gain any benefit from aiming at Long or greater range, the weapon must
be braced in some way.  This can be on a rest, bipod, or fired from a
stable prone or seated position.  If these standards are not met, treat
firing at Long or greater as being performed at a range beyond the weapons
printed range.  IF the weapon's printed range is less than Long, it cannot
benefit from aiming at Long or greater unless braced (no additional AP
expenditures allowed).

Quick Shots.

Combatants may choose to fire off shots quickly without aiming.  Use the to
hit task above with the following changes:

Task is one level more difficult for range
Cost is 2AP
Additional AP expenditures are not allowed.

Smart Weapons.

Certain weapons have a bonus to hit included in the weapon description.
This bonus applies only to shots fired using the regular fire task.
Autofire:

Autofire is the use of weapons that fire multiple shots/pulses/pellets for
every task attempt.

The main use of auto fire is suppression fire.  In this role, the weapon is
fired as rapidly as possible (use the task for quick fire, above) into an
area to deny it to the enemy.

When using suppression fire, total the number of rounds fired into the
designated area (called the Beaten Zone).  Anyone entering this area during
that turn has to roll D6 equal to the number of rounds.  Every 6 on the
dice indicates a hit by a random round.  Remove one die from the die pool
for every hit, then halve the pool for the remainder of the round.  Repeat
the process for every target that enters the Beaten Zone.  Because of the
extreme danger suppressive fire causes anyone attempting to enter the
Beaten Zone must succeed at the following task:

To enter a Beaten Zone:
INT+Tactics < Staggering (4D6)
Spectacular Failure results in the combatant losing all APs for two turns.

Aimed Autofire (Burst Fire):

Burst fire is the skill of using short, controlled bursts to increase
chances of hitting opponents.  When rolling the to-hit task, every 3 points
of success below the task number results in an additional hit, up to the
size of the burst.  Combatants adjacent to the target may be hit by any
rounds that do not strike the original target.  Roll the to-hit task with
an additional 2 levels of difficulty.

Shotguns and Flechettes.

Multi-projectile weapons act differently at different ranges.

At Contact range shotguns firing pellets and flechette rounds strike a
single target as a single blow.  Total the damage done by all the
projectiles in the shot; armor provides double normal protection.

Beyond Contact, the shot is treated as a burst (see above) containing a
number of shots equal to the number of projectiles.

Thrown Weapons.

Thrown weapons include rocks, grenades, knives, and penguins.

To hit with a thrown weapon:
DEX+Throwing < Range Difficulty
Requires an AP expenditure (cost depends on weight)
AP may be spent to increase target number
If task fails, check deviation

          7-8
         6 | 9
          \|/
        5----10
          /|\
         4 | 11
          2-3

12 indicates a wild throw.  Referee determines results.

Distance is 1D6/2 meters at Contact and Very Short, 1D6 meters at Short.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 11:20:51 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: TL of Terra/Solomani in the Rim War (summary for those tired of it)

So, basically, Leroy's argument can be summarized as
(1) Megatraveller says the Imperium reaches TL-15 in 1000
(2) Since we all know that the Solomani are great, and can't possibly
    be worse off than the Imperium, they must be TL-15 at the time of 
    the Rim War (998) as well
(3) The tech levels in the Invasion Earth game are wrong
  or  
(3b)All the TL-15 troops on both sides had been redeployed elsewhere so that
    they didn't have to participate in the single most important ground 
    battle of the war - a battle that both sides effectively lost
(4) Only Terra was TL-15 of all the Solomani worlds
    and losing the war (losing about 1/3 of their territory) traumatized them
    so much that they forgot how to be TL-15 for a hundred years (possibly
    because they were too busy evacuating TL-15 troops to evacuate any
    scientists, engineers, or technical information.)
  or
(4B)All the other TL-15 worlds in the Solomani sphere sunk back to TL-14 
    following the war
  or
(4C)Supplement 10 is wrong and you should make a bunch of Solomani worlds
    TL-15, because we all know the Solomani are great.
(5) If the Solomani were TL-14 the Imperium would have stomped them, 
    even though the Imperium transitioned to TL-15 during the war (no time to
    build any significant quantities of TL-15 warships), the Imperium is on
    the offensive (which is *hard*, against a lot of high-pop worlds with
    strong local defence forces), and the Imperium has to worry about the
    Zhodani (who are frankly a lot more worrying than, say, the Hivers are
    to the Solomani.) 

That prettu much summarizes his arguments. Conflicting theories - that the 
Imperium was barely TL-15 in 1000, with no TL-15 military forces, and that
the Solomani were lagging behind, unsurprisingly given that they had been
seperate for a hundred years or so and had a smaller industrial base and a
repressive society and hence were low TL-14, even Terra, at the time of the
Rim War - are clearly not to be considered, even though it is practically
an axiom of Traveller that the Imperium is the leading technological
civilization of its era (with the possible exception of the Hivers.)

Bruce

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 14:51:52 -0400
From: "Paul D. Owensby" <pauld@athens.net>
Subject: Beginnings 0.95beta Buglet...

There is a bug in 0.95beta that causes it to goof while printing out the
Life Events information if you choose to "(p)Print" the character file
rather than "(s)Save" it to a text file. It will still do everything ok, but
it will print one line of the character's life history to a page with a form
feed after each one. I had caught and fixed it earlier, but uploaded the
wrong one to the webpage. The new, fixed version is now up; if your
Begining.exe file has a time other than 2:36pm on it, you either need 
to get the newest version off my page, ask me to mail it to you (please
state whether you want it UUE or MIME), or just not use the direct
to printer function.

Sorry 'bout that :(

**********************************************************
Paul Darius Owensby (pauld@athens.net)                   
ValuJump Lines:"So Economical, You'll Think You're Part of the Crew" (tm)
Pan-Imperia: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/Paul_Owensby/
Home of ValuJump Lines, Pan-Imperia Shipyards, and Beginnings for DOS.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 97 20:00 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: RoM/Terran TL

In-Reply-To: <33FFAB27.3673@flash.net>

> > > (Does anyone with access to Supplement 10 remember if there were any TL-15
> > > worlds on the Solomani side of the border even in 1107?)
> > 
> > Don't have it handy, but I'm 99% sure no.
>  
> Actually there are. Scandia Subsector (home to the Cymbeline system) has
> 4.

That's the Arcturus Subsector, and they're all Imperial worlds.
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 12:10:23 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

Marc writes

>Here is the actual expected statistics table for tasks (including 2.5D for
>Difficult).

>CHANCE OF TASK SUCCESS
>                Easy    Avg     Diff    For     Sta     Imp     Hop

My problem with this is that there are *way* too many different task
levels by this point - too many for a person to keep straight in their
mind during play (is "Staggering" worse than "Formidable"? "Hopeless"
worse than "Impossible"?) (Plus, you have to remember that the 2.5D
comes in in Average...) with little distinction in them for a 
"typical" PC (about a 8+3 or 8+4...)
        12      -       100%    91%     74%     34%     10%     2%

Is it really important to have a task with a 74% vs 91% success chance?

My proposal would be to trim this down to fewer levals - 
call them Easy/Average/Difficult/Formidable/Imposible, and rate them
2d/3d/4d/6d/7d - thereby losing the half-die and simplifying the task
chart. (Possibly it could be Easy/Average/Difficult/Formidable/Staggering/
Impossible, for 2/3/4/5/6/7d - that'd be easier to remember.)

Bruce

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 13:15:21 -0600
From: lguatney@carbon.cudenver.edu (Leroy William Lu Guatney)
Subject: Re: RoM/Terra TL (Occam)

Ummm, sorry.  I missed one post I should have sent.

Occam's Razor:

   J.P. pointed out that I shouldn't allow my somewhat unusual sense of
humor to leave any misunderstandings.

   Of course I know what Occam's Razor is.  In summary, my previously pointing
out the KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid) principal applies.

   The simplest of all solutions to the whole discussion is what I have
already pointed out.  Change that one table in the MegaTraveller Referee's
Companion, pg. 34 to read "JUMP TECH".  There are no other lining outs
required in the rest of our books, so we don't have to go writing in them.

   That _is_ the simplest of all interpretations.  J.P. is right.  That one
elegant solution goes a _long_ way to understanding things.  It is compatible
with _everything_ else, and solves _all_ perceived "problems."

Leroy

(These are my last words for now.  I will be starting a "Traveller Solution
Series" later on TML, but I will remain pretty much in post-only mode.

Lateron. Until then ...


Leroy Guatney - lwlg@usa.net
 University of Mars, NorthAm Campus
 Class of '98

------------------------------

Date: 25 Aug 1997 19:35:31 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: CSC Bug Fix Uploaded

I've uploaded a new version of CSC (1.0.3b), which fixes the sailing bug (and
a couple of others), and also notifies the user when volume and surface area
limitations are exceeded.  As usual, it can be found at:

http://www.interlog.com/~dmci104/GamingClub/Traveller/software.html

Warning: the CSC design system doesn't work very well for low-tech ships. I
couldn't recreate any Greek or Roman ships (a field where I have some small
expertise).  

Another warning: the CSC design system doesn't look to be too compatible with
FFS2 (at least, not the parts I've started to work on).  You may want to make
a ruling in your campaign to cover conflicts.  (Personally, I plan on using
CSC until I get my FFS2 software working, then 'jump' to FFS2 designs.
Players may experience a moment of dizziness as their vehicles' performance
changes.)

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1747
***********************************
Traveller-digest      Tuesday, August 26 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1748



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: TACS, an intoduction
Re: TACS, an intoduction
Re: New Task System Suggestion
RE: Max skill level
THUDDD 6 Update
re: shotguns hurt like F***
Stat vs Skills Task Suggestion
Delivery Airvan (TL10)
Special Ops Transport (TL8)
Ground-Attack Fighter (TL8)
Model A Car (TL4)
Zarathustran Luxury Aircar (TL12)
Arden Aircar (TL15)
Air Slug!!
Steam Shovel (TL4)
Airbus (TL10)
Airbus (TL12)
Re:Femicide - already happened
Prototype Tank (TL4)
Re: Marc's Comments on Skill Levels
Re: Task Resolution
Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations
Re: Brokers (was Re: Task Resolution)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 12:49:54 -0700
From: "Evyn MacDude" <wmacdude@concentric.net>
Subject: Re: TACS, an intoduction

- ----------
> From: Douglas E. Berry <dberry@hooked.net>
> Subject: TACS, an intoduction
> Date: Sunday, August 24, 1997 5:03 PM
> 
> Here it is.
> 
> This is based on my training, my experiences, and much research into to
how
> humans react to combat.  I hope you all find this useful, or at least
> interesting.
> 
> A note aboput how people react to this system..  At first, they go balls
to
> the wall, spending all their APs in mad rushes and hails of fire.  This
> lasts until they find themselves standing up in the middle of a field
> taking hits from every direction.
> 
> Next you get the turtle syndrome.  After getting perforated a few times,
> many players are afraid to spend a single AP, trying to keep all of their
> points avalible for quick reactions.  Which is realistic, I suppose.

Doug, Cool system, Want to see more. Like snapshot it kills off the
impulsive one rather quikly.

Evyn,
Warleader of the Clan MacDude
Yuppie Hunter of the Forgotten Surf
	Fortalice Desertum
	AD. 1997

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 12:49:54 -0700
From: "Evyn MacDude" <wmacdude@concentric.net>
Subject: Re: TACS, an intoduction

- ----------
> From: Douglas E. Berry <dberry@hooked.net>
> Subject: TACS, an intoduction
> Date: Sunday, August 24, 1997 5:03 PM
> 
> Here it is.
> 
> This is based on my training, my experiences, and much research into to
how
> humans react to combat.  I hope you all find this useful, or at least
> interesting.
> 
> A note aboput how people react to this system..  At first, they go balls
to
> the wall, spending all their APs in mad rushes and hails of fire.  This
> lasts until they find themselves standing up in the middle of a field
> taking hits from every direction.
> 
> Next you get the turtle syndrome.  After getting perforated a few times,
> many players are afraid to spend a single AP, trying to keep all of their
> points avalible for quick reactions.  Which is realistic, I suppose.

Doug, Cool system, Want to see more. Like snapshot it kills off the
impulsive one rather quikly.

Evyn,
Warleader of the Clan MacDude
Yuppie Hunter of the Forgotten Surf
	Fortalice Desertum
	AD. 1997

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 97 21:19 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: New Task System Suggestion

In-Reply-To: <33FFC188.46B@alaska.net>

Peter,

> How about a system in which charecters would take stat + skill level d6
> for greater than or equal to a target number. 
>  
> So if a charecter with Edu=9 and Engineering-3 was trying to fix the
> Engines on her starship she would roll 9+3d6 against a difficulty level.

It gets silly for high skills. The few dice rolled the better.
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 97 21:19 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: RE: Max skill level

In-Reply-To: <199708242210.SAA21606@Mithril.MPGN.COM>

Eris,

> >> I think 15 is a sensible limit, since stats are also capped at 15.
>  
> >How about the value of the controlling stat, so an average PC has a max
> >skill  of 7?
>  
> And a controlling stat of 2 causes all skills that use it to max out at 2?
> I've got a problem with that. ;-> If we can boost the low end a little it
> might work, though.

I don't see the problem. 
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 13:31:34 -0700 (PDT)
From: Craig Berry <cberry@cinenet.net>
Subject: THUDDD 6 Update

Hi, all...

My home PC is *finally* back from the shop, and all the THUDDD-related
files are intact (woo-hoo!).  A few utilities I use for THUDDD processing
are not, however, and I'm currently scraping those together.  As soon as I
succeed at this (likely tonight or tomorrow), I'll be updating the THUDDD
6 page and sending out the ballots.  Sorry once again for the delay, and
thanks for your patience. 

- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
   |   Craig Berry - cberry@cinenet.net
 --*--    Home Page: http://www.cinenet.net/users/cberry/home.html
   |      Member of The HTML Writers Guild: http://www.hwg.org/   
       "Every man and every woman is a star."

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 17:29:09 -0400
From: "Glenn Crawford" <glennc@nelvana.com>
Subject: re: shotguns hurt like F***

Am I being too harsh here?  Or do you think this is a good roll?

...just curious about what the rest of you think.

Shotguns do not throw you backwards. The actual energy is REALLY low, on
tthe measure of a few kilos. Knockback is a reflex action. 

That is smething I am working on. Besides realistic damage, realistic
effects. People do not usually die from one shot. (actual average casualty
rate in war is on  the area of 1-3%) One ballistics expert calculated to
kill a human being through anything other than shock (discounting hits to
the brainstem which are always lethal) would require a 45mm shell. People
instinctively clutch and tuck when hit. Discipline on the battlefield is
also training to ignore that pain and reflex. Which is why I liked TNE's
initiative (derived from Twilight:2000's coolness under fire). It gave me  a
derived stat to work from, not just slapping an arbitrary number on PC's
(and also avoiding the former bureaucrat who reacts to gunfights in the same
way he reacts to an ooffer of  a martini, "Why thank you, don't mind if I
do").

And while I am already ranting, T4 needs some kind of sanity/morale system.
Teach the players to not murder people, and avoid excessive combat. It also
deals wiith the "sure, my character can handle having no leave for 2 years
as I travel from one end of the Imperium to the other without going mad from
boredom"

------------------------------

Date: 25 Aug 1997 22:05:25 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Stat vs Skills Task Suggestion

In all this stat vs skills controversy, I think it's about time to repeat a
suggestion I mad a few months ago.

Stick to the target number being stat+skill, which seems to be what Marc
wants anyway.

However, divide the stat by the number of simultaneous tasks and distractions
that the character is doing/experiencing.  This will have the net effect of
allowing high-skill characters to to more things at once, or cope with more
distractions, than relatively untrained but talented novices.

For example, let's consider two engineers.  

One has Edu 10, Eng 2, the other Edu 6, Eng 6.  Both have a target number of
12, and are trying to repair the ship's drive.

However, the captain of the ship (another player) keeps asking for status
updates every five minutes.  This is a distraction, and the referee rules
that the engineer's Edu must be halved.  This means that the talent novice
has a target number of 10/2+2=7, while the experienced bloke has a target
number of 6/2+6=9.  Clearly, the experienced chap has an edge.

Any thoughts?

------------------------------

Date: 25 Aug 1997 23:13:46 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Delivery Airvan (TL10)

Delivery Airvan (TL10)
Designed by Robert Prior

Summary:
     1.50 displacement ton box;  10.3 tonnes;  kCr 14.8
Chassis:</DT>
     21.0 kL box (4.3 m long x 2.2 m wide x 2.2 m high);  Structure: 490 kg
of crystaliron, body 0.01 cm thick, 1 armour rating
     
Performance:
     500 kW TL10 Fusion Plus power plant;  Fuel: 25.0 L of enriched water
(25.0 kg), 100 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 500 kW contragrav;  Maximum Speed: 148 km/h;  Range:
14792 km;  Agility: 0DM
Crew & Passengers:
     Crew roster: pilot;  1 crew station;  1 roomy passenger seat
Communications:
     Subcontinental Radio (100 W, TL10, SmVcl)
Sensors:
     Active Subregional Radar (100 W)  Resolution: 5.0 mm per km of range
Other:
Safety Features: anti-theft system, Roadgrid
17.0 kL of cargo space


Designed with CSC (software Robert Prior, 1997)

------------------------------

Date: 25 Aug 1997 23:13:13 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Special Ops Transport (TL8)

Special Ops Transport (TL8)
Designed by Robert Prior

Summary:
     5.50 displacement ton box streamlined;  15.2 tonnes;  kCr 832
Chassis:</DT>
     77.0 kL box streamlined (6.6 m long x 3.4 m wide x 3.4 m high); 
Structure: 1.23 tonnes of light composite, body 0.01 cm thick, 1 armour
rating;  Stealth Structure: -3DM against TL8- military and TL9- civilian
sensors
     
Performance:
     2.10 MW TL8 Turbine, MHD power plant;  Fuel: 4.20 kL of high-grade hcarb
(4.20 tonnes), 20 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 2.00 MW helicopter with stealthed rotors;  Maximum
Speed: 313 km/h;  Range: 6250 km;  Agility: +3DM
Crew & Passengers:
     Crew roster: pilot, 2 gunners, sensor operator;  4 crew stations (4.0 cm
of Composite Laminate armour, rating 11);  30 roomy passenger seats
Armament:
     Weapon                          Damage    Range          Shots   
Reloads   Notes
     Autocannon, Light-8             10 (7 exp)Long           100     9      
  +4DM, remote
     Autocannon, Light-8             10 (7 exp)Long           100     9      
  +4DM, remote
     Missile, AT-8                   33 (21 expShort          1       3      
  coaxial
Communications:
     Continental Radio (100 kW, TL8, SmVcl, MilSpec, DirFnd)
     Subregional Laser (100 W, TL8, SmVcl, MilSpec)
Sensors:
     Active Regional Radar (2.00 kW, MilSpec, DispArray, MultArray) 
Resolution: 5.0 mm per km of range
     Active Subregional Lidar (100 W, MilSpec, DispArray)  Resolution: 5.0 mm
per km of range
     Active Subregional Jammer (100 W, MilSpec)
Other:
2.92 kL of cargo space


Designed with CSC (software Robert Prior, 1997)

------------------------------

Date: 25 Aug 1997 23:12:22 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Ground-Attack Fighter (TL8)

Ground-Attack Fighter (TL8)
Designed by Robert Prior

Summary:
     1.00 displacement ton cylinder airframe;  10.3 tonnes;  MCr 4.53
Chassis:</DT>
     14.0 kL cylinder airframe (5.10 m long x 1.7 m wide x 1.7 m high,
wingspan 7.8 m);  Structure: 309 kg of composite laminate, body 0.03 cm
thick, sealed (1 atm)
     Armour: 5 front (0.37 cm), 5 sides (0.37 cm), 5 rear (0.37 cm), 5 top
(0.37 cm), 5 bottom (0.37 cm), 2 wing (0.03 cm);  Stealth Structure: -3DM
against TL8- military and TL9- civilian sensors
Performance:
     2x 1.01 MW TL8 Turbine, MHD power plants;  Fuel: 2.01 kL of high-grade
hcarb (2.01 tonnes), 10 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 2.00 MW high performance aircraft;  Maximum Speed:
803 km/h, Take-Off Speed: 266 km/h;  Range: 8000 km;  Agility: +3DM
Crew:
     Crew roster: pilot;  1 crew station with ejection seats (4.0 cm of
Composite Laminate armour, rating 11)
Armament:
     Weapon                          Damage    Range          Shots   
Reloads   Notes
     Missile, AT-8                   33 (21 expShort          1       7      
  coaxial
     Bomb, Fuel-Air-8                8         Contact        1       3      
  coaxial
     Autocannon, Light-8             10 (7 exp)Long           100     9      
  +4DM, coaxial
     Autocannon, Light-8             10 (7 exp)Long           100     9      
  coaxial
Communications:
     Subcontinental Radio (10.00 kW, TL8, SmVcl, MilSpec, DirFnd)
     Regional Jammer (1.00 kW, TL8, SmVcl, MilSpec)
Sensors:
     Active Regional Radar (1.00 kW, MilSpec, DispArray)  Resolution: 2.0 cm
per km of range
     Active Regional Lidar (1.00 kW, MilSpec, DispArray)  Resolution: 5.0 mm
per km of range
     Active Regional Jammer (1.00 kW, MilSpec)


Designed with CSC (software Robert Prior, 1997)

------------------------------

Date: 26 Aug 1997 00:41:02 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Model A Car (TL4)

Model A Car (TL4)
Designed by Robert Prior

Summary:
     0.60 displacement ton open-topped box;  2.11 tonnes;  kCr 23.4
Chassis:
     8.40 kL open-topped box (3.2 m long x 1.6 m wide x 1.6 m high); 
Structure: 479 kg of soft steel, body 0.02 cm thick, 1 armour rating
     
Performance:
     150 kW TL4 Internal Combustion power plant;  Fuel: 149 L of hydrocarbons
(149 kg), 10 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 150 kW wheels;  Maximum Speed: 51 km/h;  Range: 511
km;  Agility: +2DM
Crew & Passengers:
     Crew roster: driver;  1 crew station;  3 roomy passenger seats
Communications:
     No communicators installed.
Sensors:
     No sensors installed.
Other:
266 L of cargo space


Designed with CSC (software Robert Prior, 1997)

------------------------------

Date: 26 Aug 1997 00:41:45 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Zarathustran Luxury Aircar (TL12)

Zarathustran Luxury Aircar (TL12)
Designed by Robert Prior

Summary:
     1.10 displacement ton box streamlined;  2.38 tonnes;  kCr 30.8
Chassis:
     15.4 kL box streamlined (3.9 m long x 2.0 m wide x 2.0 m high); 
Structure: 119 kg of structurecomp, body 0.04 cm thick, sealed (1 atm), 1
armour rating
     
Performance:
     418 kW TL12 Fusion Plus power plant with vacuum radiators;  Fuel: 13.1 L
of enriched water (13.1 kg), 100 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 300 kW contragrav;  Maximum Speed: 2052 km/h;  Range:
204437 km;  Agility: -15DM
Crew & Passengers:
     Crew roster: pilot;  1 crew station;  6 roomy passenger seats
Communications:
     Orbital Radio (10.00 kW, TL12, SmVcl)
Sensors:
     Active Subregional Radar (100 W)  Resolution: 0.200 mm per km of range
Other:
Options: entertainment centre, wet bar
Safety Features: anti-theft system, Roadgrid
924 L of cargo space


Designed with CSC (software Robert Prior, 1997)

------------------------------

Date: 26 Aug 1997 00:42:16 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Arden Aircar (TL15)

Arden Aircar (TL15)
Designed by Robert Prior

Summary:
     1.50 displacement ton box streamlined;  3.73 tonnes;  kCr 46.1
Chassis:
     21.0 kL box streamlined (4.3 m long x 2.2 m wide x 2.2 m high); 
Structure: 473 kg of bonded superdense, body 0.00 cm thick, sealed (1 atm), 1
armour rating
     
Performance:
     657 kW TL15 Fusion Plus power plant with vacuum radiators;  Fuel: 10.1 L
of enriched water (10.1 kg), 100 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 500 kW contragrav with orbital package;  Maximum
Speed: 2772 km/h;  Range: 276178 km;  Agility: -20DM
Crew & Passengers:
     Crew roster: pilot;  1 crew station;  4 roomy passenger seats
Communications:
     Orbital Radio (10.00 kW, TL15, SmVcl)
Sensors:
     Active Subregional Radar (100 W)  Resolution: 0.005 mm per km of range
Other:
Options: entertainment centre, recreation space, wet bar
Safety Features: anti-theft system, Roadgrid
2.24 kL of cargo space


Designed with CSC (software Robert Prior, 1997)

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 20:19:26 -0500
From: Sam Thomas <sinbad@dfw.net>
Subject: Air Slug!!

This to test to see if any TML traffic is getting thru. I have seen no
messages for two days.

- -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
(c)1997 Sam Thomas  |Email:sinbad@dfw.net|
Sinbad Sam, Owner and Operator of Sinbad Sam's Saloon 
Chief Weapons Designer For Reddkneck Arms and Munitions
- -----------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: 26 Aug 1997 01:13:28 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Steam Shovel (TL4)

Steam Shovel (TL4)
Designed by Robert Prior

Summary:
     1.00 displacement ton open-topped box;  5.16 tonnes;  kCr 139
Chassis:
     14.0 kL open-topped box (3.7 m long x 1.9 m wide x 1.9 m high); 
Structure: 674 kg of soft steel, body 0.02 cm thick, 1 armour rating
     
Performance:
     83.0 kW TL4 Steam power plant;  Fuel: 24.9 L of coal (49.8 kg), 8 hours
supply
     Propulsion System: 80.0 kW tracks with wide tracks;  Maximum Speed: 8
km/h;  Range: 66 km;  Agility: +3DM
Crew:
     Crew roster: driver;  1 crew station
Communications:
     No communicators installed.
Sensors:
     No sensors installed.
Other:
Construction Equipment: shovel can dig 6.0 m deep and excavate 12.0 kL per
hour


Designed with CSC (software Robert Prior, 1997)

------------------------------

Date: 26 Aug 1997 01:14:24 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Airbus (TL10)

Airbus (TL10)
Designed by Robert Prior

Summary:
     8.00 displacement ton box;  17.4 tonnes;  kCr 141
Chassis:
     112 kL box (7.5 m long x 3.9 m wide x 3.9 m high);  Structure: 1.50
tonnes of crystaliron, body 0.01 cm thick, sealed (1 atm), 1 armour rating
     
Performance:
     2.07 MW TL10 Fusion Plus power plant;  Fuel: 103 L of enriched water
(103 kg), 100 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 2.00 MW contragrav with orbital package;  Maximum
Speed: 1014 km/h;  Range: 101092 km;  Agility: -7DM
Crew & Passengers:
     Crew roster: pilot;  1 crew station;  45 roomy passenger seats
Communications:
     Orbital Radio (10.00 kW, TL10, SmVcl)
Sensors:
     Active Regional Radar (1.00 kW)  Resolution: 5.0 mm per km of range
Other:
Options: entertainment centre, wet bar
Safety Features: Roadgrid, fire suppression system
12.1 kL of cargo space


Designed with CSC (software Robert Prior, 1997)

------------------------------

Date: 26 Aug 1997 01:14:00 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Airbus (TL12)

Airbus (TL12)
Designed by Robert Prior

Summary:
     8.00 displacement ton box;  14.6 tonnes;  kCr 164
Chassis:
     112 kL box (7.5 m long x 3.9 m wide x 3.9 m high);  Structure: 449 kg of
structurecomp, body 0.04 cm thick, sealed (1 atm), 1 armour rating
     
Performance:
     1.54 MW TL12 Fusion Plus power plant;  Fuel: 48.2 L of enriched water
(48.2 kg), 100 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 1.50 MW contragrav with orbital package;  Maximum
Speed: 1636 km/h;  Range: 162986 km;  Agility: -15DM
Crew & Passengers:
     Crew roster: pilot;  1 crew station;  45 roomy passenger seats
Communications:
     Orbital Radio (10.00 kW, TL12, SmVcl)
Sensors:
     Active Regional Radar (1.00 kW)  Resolution: 0.200 mm per km of range
Other:
Options: entertainment centre, wet bar
Safety Features: Roadgrid, fire suppression system
10.5 kL of cargo space


Designed with CSC (software Robert Prior, 1997)

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 97 01:44:00 GMT 
From: s.johnson107@genie.com
Subject: Re:Femicide - already happened

On Sat, 23 Aug 1997 19:24:49, Jo_Grant/DUB/Lotus@lotus.com Wrote...

> Yo Folks,
> Just catching up on old digests. Many people said how the imbalance
> in genders by selective killing of female children in India and/or
> China will have to even out pretty soon. Actually, there is another
> historical example that was much worse.
    ::blink::

> Based on evidence in Scandinavian graveyards they, too, practiced
> selective female infanticide and ended up with a gender ratio of 7 or
> 8 to 1! Far more pronounced than we are currently seeing. The result?
> Well, large bands of angry young men roaming from as far as Nova
> Scotia to Byzantium.
> One can put a whole new twist on TNE's "Star Vikings" :-)...
    The heck with that!  It puts a whole new twist on the whole historical
Viking era!  But... it does explain an awful lot though, like why the Sagas are
so frigging murderously bloodthirsty violent.  Makes sense suddenly with
population shifts like that. ;)

> PS: I can cite the references for this if anyone want to read further
> on it.
    Please!  While the Viking era isn't my favorite in history, the
implications are something I'm interested it. ;)
    Many thanks in advance...

Stephen

------------------------------

Date: 26 Aug 1997 02:29:22 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Prototype Tank (TL4)

Prototype Tank (TL4)
Designed by Robert Prior

Summary:
     2.00 displacement ton box;  17.4 tonnes;  kCr 424
Chassis:
     28.0 kL box (4.7 m long x 2.4 m wide x 2.4 m high);  Structure: 1.07
tonnes of soft steel, body 2.0 cm thick
     Armour: 6 front (2.5 cm, moderate slope), 6 sides (2.5 cm, moderate
slope), 6 rear (2.5 cm, moderate slope), 5 top (2.0 cm), 5 bottom (2.0 cm)
Performance:
     350 kW TL4 Internal Combustion power plant;  Fuel: 175 L of hydrocarbons
(175 kg), 5 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 350 kW tracks with wide tracks;  Maximum Speed: 13
km/h;  Range: 65 km;  Agility: +3DM
Crew:
     Crew roster: driver, 9 gunners;  10 crew stations
Armament:
     Weapon                          Damage    Range          Shots   
Reloads   Notes
     Cannon, Heavy-4                 22 exp    Long           1       25     
  5 gunners
     Machinegun-4                    4         Medium         200     10     
  2 gunners
     Machinegun-4                    4         Medium         200     10     
  2 gunners
Communications:
     No communicators installed.
Sensors:
     No sensors installed.
Other:
147 L of cargo space


Designed with CSC (software Robert Prior, 1997)

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 12:57:23 -0800
From: Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca>
Subject: Re: Marc's Comments on Skill Levels

>If this is the case why change the skill level meanings?  In CT/MT
>Medical 3 = Doctor, naval Architect 3 = Professional.  These
>distinctions were all written down in the rules.  If character's
>receive approximately the same number of skills in
>approximately the same ranges then why change the meanings
>of the skill levels?

Because skill levels don't mean the same thing they did in CT/MT. Look,
there was a huge flamefest about this a while ago which I don't want to
duplicate. The point is, in T4 there is practically no correlation between
skill level and how good you are. In CT/MT a character with a skill level
of 3 performed significantly better at the skill than a person with a low
skill level. In T4 this is not the case, you have no idea how good a
character with a given skill level is. A character with a skill level of 6
can be a total incompetent and someone with a skill level of 1 a master
because your target number is the skill level plus controlling
characteristic, and characteristics have significantly larger values and
variabilities than skill levels. Whether you agree with this mechanic or
not, that's how T4 works.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 97 22:06:50 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

On 08/25/97 at 10:49 AM,  CardSharks@aol.com said:

>I posted because someone said that skills in T41 were 0-15 based, with an
>average of 7. Since I never said that, I made a specific post that stated
>what I perceived were the specific criticisms of task resolution so that I
>could understand them and counter them (or adapt to them). 
 
>I also stated that the task chapter draft was available to anyone by
>request. I think people are dreaming if they think that the end result
>will be much different from that draft. 

Fair enough. Now, I know I should stop suggesting changes for T4.1
concerning the task/CharGen system.  It'll have to be, "House rules, ho!"
;->
 
>On the other hand, I have gotten a lot of insight by writing tasks to
>accompany the skill chapter entries, and I have modified the task chapter
>accordingly. 

Yep, there are a lot of good ideas in the chapter.

Eris

- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 22:33:18 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations

Garry Ward <Garry.E.Ward@worldnet.att.net> wrote
> Subject: Re: 
> 
> At 04:19 PM 8/24/97 +0000, Semo wrote:
> ><snip>
> >Now, when I connected the two subsectors together and saw the two
> >huge mains, visions of Free Trader unions danced in my head,
> >massive subsector wide lines as well.  I loved it.  One problem is,
> >though, that on one of the mains, there is a very low tech world lacking
> >both starport and gas giant.  ie.  dead end.

If this planet has nonfluid oceans anyone with a streamlined ship can
simply land in the oceans, pump water into the ship, refine it in the
fuel processors and go.  If the world is low tech and does not have
water it should probably not have a population (unless it is a native
minor race).  I would also like to point out that the formal definiton
of 0 hydrographics in the UPP is a world with less than 4% of its
surface covered with water.  Four percent of the surface of a planet is
quite a big area.  For example the Mediterranean Sea, on Earth, occupies
about 6 hexes (out of 500) in my Solomani & Aslan.  If the Earth had no
surface water except for the Mediterranean it would have a 0 for
hydrographics. Starships could land in the Med and refuel though if they
wanted too.  Use common sense before you go with the rule that says if
the hydrographics is 0 you can't refuel there.  This world is not a dead
end. If the natives are low tech they will not be able to stop you and
probably will not even notice (unless they have imported SDB's).  Maybe
some of flying saucers we see are Vilani ships stoping to refuel in our
oceans... :)

> ><snip>

> Why a dead end? Develop it. One or more of your trade organizations has
> people on planet trying to obtain rights to develop a port there. Develop
> the port without the locals input; select an isolated area near a body of
> water and have a trade organization, a consortium of organizations, or even
> a aggressive individual initiate a port & refueling operation. 

> If you are still at the design stage of your universe; simply add the Gas
> Giant. If you rolled the subsectors randomly, you have the right to adjust
> the rolls to fit your planned story line or lines, add the gas giant where
> you want. 
> You, as Referee, are god, not the dice. 

It will make a more interesting story if he leaves it as it is.  The
players might not even remember stoping at the gas giant of a lowtech
nonwater world - but they will remember stopping at this deep space
outpost.  The costs of doing business in the middle of nowhere will be a
great reason for trippling the prices of everything sold at this station
- - which is a good way to bleed extra cash out of the players pockets.

 Even if it has no water ships can mine for ice in the asteroid belt or
find comets & refine them.  However these tasks are more of a hassle
than simply going to a deep space station.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 23:34:30 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Re: Brokers (was Re: Task Resolution)

Leroy William Lu Guatney wrote

> >But, skills in T4.1 will not be like this, according to Marc's post
> >today.  He said that character's skills will average between 2-4, just
> >like in CT/MT.
> >
> >You might get an occassional level 7, but that happened in CT too.
> >
> >Given this information, based on Marc's empiracle (how do you spell that
> >word anyway?) evidence, we don't need new skill definitions.
> >
> >Kenneth.
> >
> 
> Sorry, but I have not followed all of this thread.  If what Kenneth is
> saying above is true, then why did we boost the Broker Skill to the new
> tables.  IIRC, Broker-8 is now the +4 DM at Starports.
> 
> I know Marc said he was going to adopt it, but is Broker +4 DM going to
> be that common?

I am the person who suggested that each 2 levels of Broker skill provide
a +1 DM on the actual value table.  The reason I suggested this is that
it was clear to me that T4 would have so many Brokers with Broker-4 or
better that a +4 DM this was too much of a benefit for Broker-4 to
provide. Yes Broker-8 will be very rare among PC's but NPC Brokers who
will average somewhat older and have more total skills and a less
diverse skill assortment will have better DM's than PC Brokers will. 

(I happen to believe that a +4 DM for skill level 4 has _always_ been
too great a benefit but that is another issue.  What I have found as a
PC is that if you want to be rich you should buy cargo space from your
ship at Cr 1,000 per ton and use the space for speculative trade.  I
have had several PC's become millionares just from speculative trade in
less than 1 campaign year - all of them started with initial investments
of under Cr 10,000 and let it snowball.  I now believe that it is quite
possible for Merchant players to have in fact paid for the starship
shares some of them start with.)

 In addition since Brokers who provide a +4 DM on the actual value table
are going to be limited to being found at class A starports only it is a
_lot_ more plausible that Broker-8 will be so rare than that Broker-4
will be so rare as to be found only at A ports.

The table below indicates the effect of variou DM's on the Actual Value
Table

Actual Value Table - Roll 2d6 + DM's

Roll	% Value  Frequency (out of 36)
		 
		      DM+0    DM+1    DM+2    DM+3    DM+4

2	40%		1	-	-	-	-
3	50%		2	1	-	-	-
4	70%		3	2	1	-	-
5	80%		4	3	2	1	-	
6	90%		5	4	3	2	1
7	100%		6	5	4	3	2
8	110%		5	6	5	4	3
9	120%		4	5	6	5	4
10	130%		3	4	5	6	5
11	150%		2	3	4	5	6
12	170%		1	2	3	4	5
13	200%		-	1	2	3	4
14	300%		-	-	1	2	3
15	400%		-	-	-	1	3
Total%			3740	4060	4630	5410	6400

Mean Value Generated	(Total% /36)

			Increase in Gross Revenue Over Previous Level	
Broker DM+0	103.9%		-
Broker DM+1	112.8%		+8.6%
Broker DM+2	128.6%		+14.2%
Broker DM+3	150.3%		+16.9%
Broker DM+4	177.8%		+18.3%

Brokerers require commisions.  The next table indicates the net (after
the Brokers commision is paid) value of your goods

Broker DM	Actual Value % 	Increase over previous level

Broker DM+0	103.9%		-
Broker DM+1	107.2%		3.1%
Broker DM+2	115.7%		7.9%
Broker DM+3	127.6%		10.3%			
Broker DM+4	142.2%		11.4%	

The math here demonstrates that you should always go with the best
broker available as you will statistically earn more monay, even after
Broker fees are paid.  These tables only look at Broker skill the
question of using your Trader skill to help estimate the future sale
price of trade goods and only buying the more saleable ones will only
increase Merchant profits farther - but in an unquantifiable way.

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1748
***********************************
Traveller-digest      Tuesday, August 26 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1749



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Stat vs Skills Task Suggestion
Re: Little black books (was RE: Binders and other Trivia)
Re: Winded
Re: Stat vs Skills Task Suggestion
Re: Task Resolution
Re: More bad URLs
Re: Task Resolution
Re: Marc's Comments on Skill Levels
Re: What I'd like to see--Task Resolution
Re: What I'd like to see--Task Resolution
Re: Task Resolution
RE: Pocket Empires JavaScript
RE: Blowthrough
Re: Air Slug!!
Re: New Proposal for the RoM TL Debate
Re: Little black books (was RE: Binders and other Trivia)
Re: Winded
Re: Phil Foglio
Re: Blowthrough
Re: TACS- some observations
Re: T4.1 Skills, Craftsman
Re: Solomani TL
Re: Solomani TL

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 09:29:28 +0000 ()
From: kraehe@bakunin.hb.north.de (Michael Koehne)
Subject: Stat vs Skills Task Suggestion

Moin Rob Prior,

> However, the captain of the ship (another player) keeps asking for status
> updates every five minutes.  This is a distraction, and the referee rules
> that the engineer's Edu must be halved.  This means that the talent novice
> has a target number of 10/2+2=7, while the experienced bloke has a target
> number of 6/2+6=9.  Clearly, the experienced chap has an edge.
> 
> Any thoughts?

	take a hammer and throw it towards the captain next time
	he comes in. tell the vagr to secure the door is an other
	posibility.
- -- 
	kraehe@bakunin.north.de		human.is-bremen.de/~kraehe/traveller
		  " ceterum censeo MSDOS esse delendam "

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 11:33:07 +2
From: "RFXn" <mlaakso@utu.fi>
Subject: Re: Little black books (was RE: Binders and other Trivia)

On 24 Aug 97 at 7:49, Douglas E. Berry wrote:
 
> The first thing I did with FFS2 was take it down to Kinko's and have
> the binding cut off.  Then I put everything into page protectors and
> shoved the whole shebang into a binder.

	I'm still using FFS1, but am planning to do this for every
Traveller book I use regularly: I simply photocopy the whole book
and have a plastic spiral back fitted on the copies. My
mint-condition books stays in the shelf and I can freely underline
and spill coffee on the copy.

/RFXn     mlaakso@utu.fi        aka. Matti Laakso
 -Phone: +358-(0)2-237 9928       YO-Kyla 19 A 11
 -IRC: RFXn                       FIN-20540  TURKU
 -Talk: RFXn@delenn.yok.utu.fi    Finland

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 11:48:03 +2
From: "RFXn" <mlaakso@utu.fi>
Subject: Re: Winded

On 21 Aug 97 at 7:00, Kenneth Bearden wrote:

<largish snip>

> Am I being too harsh here?  Or do you think this is a good roll?

	I'd say that sounds just about right. Just remember _nodoby_ gets 
thrown back by a shotgun blast (except in bad Hollywood films), a 
rolling bowling ball has something like 20 times the energy of 
12-gauge buckshot at close range.

	Unless of course the shotgun fires miniature thruster pellets.. :)

/RFXn     mlaakso@utu.fi        aka. Matti Laakso
 -Phone: +358-(0)2-237 9928       YO-Kyla 19 A 11
 -IRC: RFXn                       FIN-20540  TURKU
 -Talk: RFXn@delenn.yok.utu.fi    Finland

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 10:21:36 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: Stat vs Skills Task Suggestion

> However, divide the stat by the number of simultaneous tasks and distractions
> that the character is doing/experiencing. 

This is how the multiple action rule is handled in KBv2.0.

You come up with the target number normally, then you divide by how 
many actions you are attempting in the round.

It works pretty good.

Kenneth.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 10:21:35 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

> Why is it this debate seems to come up every two months or so? Must be
> something in the water. Oh well.

Because there is a problem in T4.1, and most of us would like to see 
it fixed before the book is printed--even if we all don't agree (and 
we don't) on how it should be fixed.

Kenneth.

>

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 06:12:38 -0400
From: Andy Brick <exeus@compuserve.com>
Subject: Re: More bad URLs

Hi All,

Larry Hadley <lhadley@peterboro.net> wrote -

> 2300AD fans might notice that Jay Adan has been absent for some time...any
> pointers to any address changes for him also appreciated.

Jay Adan has passed his site over to Dave Bolack. The URL for the new
location, and for a load of other 2300AD sites are available on my site,
below.

Andy Brick
exeus@compuserve.com
http://www.caco.demon.co.uk/

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 10:21:34 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

> You just decide that a target number regardless of how you compute
> it, represents a certain ability.  For example, if target
> number = skill + stat, then you might decided that to be a qualified
> pilot a character might be represented by a target number of
> 11, regardless of whether he has stat 7 skill 4 or stat 9 skill 2.
> 
> More talented people will reach the level require level of ablity
> faster (though they might get held up by being limited at the rate
> that he is being taught).

Hmmm.  This sounds exactly like Marc's competency testing that he has 
recently posted....

I still like it though.

Kenneth.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 10:21:33 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: Marc's Comments on Skill Levels

. The point is, in T4 there is practically no correlation between
> skill level and how good you are. In CT/MT a character with a skill level
> of 3 performed significantly better at the skill than a person with a low
> skill level. In T4 this is not the case, you have no idea how good a
> character with a given skill level is.

Not true if you use a multiplier.  Higher skills give better chances 
of success--exponentially.

EX--(KBv2.0 example)

Stat-7, Skill-1  
      target number is 10

Stat-7, Skill-3
      target number is 16

 A character with a skill level of 6
> can be a total incompetent and someone with a skill level of 1 a master
> because your target number is the skill level plus controlling
> characteristic, and characteristics have significantly larger values and
> variabilities than skill levels. Whether you agree with this mechanic or
> not, that's how T4 works.

True.  And that's why we use KBv2.0, right Richard?

Kenneth.
> 
> 
> 
> 

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 10:21:32 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: What I'd like to see--Task Resolution

> Did you not notice when Marc posted the probability chart for the current
> draft T4.1 Task System? Here are the probabilities for the characters you
> describe:

snip


> So it ain't fixed. The novice with the high stat always beat the pro with
> the average stat.
> 
> This is what I've been going to great pains to point out. At present, the
> T4.1 system uses the old CT skill values (1 Novice, 3 Professional, 4
> Expert, etc), though it doesn't literally say so. But it's still quite
> possible for many characters to have one skill in the 8-13 range, which is
> far beyond any skill level I ever saw on any CT character sheet. Worse, the
> dice codes are not much different from T4. So nothing has changed. Nothing
> has been done to deal with the problem you describe.

Yes, I did realize that.  Marc needs a multiplier for the skills 
levels.  As you know, I'm for a multiplier with CT valued skills--not 
higher ranged skills.

> As I said in a previous post, either Chargen should be altered such that
> the typical professional skill level is 6-8, or Marc should adopt KBV2.0's
> skill multiplier. *Something* has to be done to boost the effect of skills
> in relation to that of stats, or the problem is not yet cured.

Agreed.  But, if he doesn't fix it, then it is much easier to make a 
fix with a multiplier on CT era skill levels than if we have a whole 
new bag of worms opened up by trying to fix large level skills.

Kenneth.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 10:49:15 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: What I'd like to see--Task Resolution

> LOL, that's what I thought you'd say.  Ken I'm afraid you are SOL. Marc, is
> as unlikely to agree to multiplying skill levels by two as he is to
> dropping the 1/2 at the difficult level.

This is sad, but true.  We are doomed to end up with a task system 
where a level 1 guy can beat a level 4 guy.

That really sucks.

But, I do like a lot of the other things Marc is doing with T4.1.  In 
spite of this task system blunder, I'm really excited about getting 
this new book.

Kenneth.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 10:49:14 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

  I asked if you were
> playing that game..notice the smiley...to give you a chuckle, because I
> *know* you would never do something like that.

Oh, gotcha.  Nope.  No hidden agenda here.  I've always been pretty 
vocal with my agendas--I don't think anybody would argue with that :)

> Yes, I know you can always "just use KB2.0", but we aren't talking about
> individual fixes we can all apply, we're talking about trying to convince
> Marc to fix the rules that go into T4.1.

And, I would like this also.

If you *really* don't think
> Characteristics that range from 2 to 12, while Skills range from 0 to 6,
> with an Asset made up of flat Characteristic+Skill will work you should to
> say so, and work with us toward a real solution. If your solution is simply
> Marc adopting KB2, then say that, too.

Well, I'm not saying KBv2.0 is the answer.  If Marc will agree to 
change the task system from simply Stat + Skill so that we don't have 
the Stat vs Skill problem, I'd gladly entertain other answers to the 
task problem.

We're not to that point yet though, so there is no use in coming up 
with ways to fix T4.1 because all of that effort is just going to end 
up as a house rule like KBv2.0.

Seriously, I could care less about KBv2.0 being used.  I just want a 
non-broken task system from T4.1. 

Any non-broken task system will do.

Kenneth.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 06:31:23 -0500
From: David Reed <david@techrefuge.com>
Subject: RE: Pocket Empires JavaScript

Hey, Rob:

> I wrote a little JavaScript proglet to compute a lot of
> the administratia in Pocket Empires.  It's 7.5k, so I
> won't post it here;  however, since I don't have my own
> web page anymore, where do y'all think it should go?
>
> Is there a page out there that manages all the little
> Traveller proglets out there?

I'll give it a homepage, if no one else's offerred yet...  I'll do the work, 
with your approval.  My TravellerWeb is somewhat lightweight right now, but... 
 Lemme know.
______________________________________________________________________

David Reed           | All wickedness is weakness: that plea therefore
                     | With God or Man will gain thee no remission.
david@techrefuge.com |                -John Milton, "Samson Agonistes"
______________________________________________________________________

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 06:35:40 -0500
From: David Reed <david@techrefuge.com>
Subject: RE: Blowthrough

Howdy.

> Mass        Maximum Damage
> 1-25kg         1D6
> 26-50kg        2D6
> 51-100kg       3D6
> 101-200kg      4D6
>
> So it will, statistically speaking, require 4 blows from a battle axe to
> kill a rabbit?

Why do you apply blowthrough (where'd that name come from? ;-) to 
non-hydrostatic, low velocity weapons?  It doesn't apply to battleaxi.

> Please, lose the blowthrough rule. It is a nice idea but just does not seem
> to work on the scale of the T4 combat system because, simply put, it IS
> harder to kill a bear with a shotgun than it would be to kill a rabbit

Ummm.  Not really.  Shotguns are another exception to der Rule.  But assume 
it's a .30-06: role all 5D, and take the highest 3; should be a lot easier to 
kill Mr. Kodiak.

______________________________________________________________________

David Reed           | All wickedness is weakness: that plea therefore
                     | With God or Man will gain thee no remission.
david@techrefuge.com |                -John Milton, "Samson Agonistes"
______________________________________________________________________

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 05:47:43 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Air Slug!!

At 08:19 PM 8/25/97 -0500, you wrote:
>This to test to see if any TML traffic is getting thru. I have seen no
>messages for two days.

My bad.  I think the TACS file choked the server.

Doug, the severely humbled.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 06:05:34 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: New Proposal for the RoM TL Debate

At 11:09 PM 8/24/97 -0600, Leroy wrote:

>On Fri, 22 Aug 1997 19:45:59 -0400
>Daniel Ray Lane <drlane@pinn.net> writes:
>>
>>How about framing this debate in the setting of Milieu 0 or Milieu
>>1100?  

>Dan, could I play the guy that has been on (Vilani) anagathics since the
>First Contact at Barnard, and is in Milieu 1100 debating those young
>"upstarts" barely a century old? :)  [That's a joke Doug. <G>]

Sure, considering the known effects of anagathetics on higher brain
functions after the first few centuries....  :)

Doug.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 06:01:35 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Little black books (was RE: Binders and other Trivia)

At 07:08 AM 8/25/97 +0100, Simon wrote:

I wrote:
>I> The first thing I did with FFS2 was take it down to Kinko's and have the
>> binding cut off.  Then I put everything into page protectors and shoved the
>> whole shebang into a binder.

>And my flatmate said I was the saddest person in the Universe when I did this 
>with FF&S ... hah, now I can prove I'm "normal" :-)

Using me as a reference for anything "normal" is not recommended.  See my
web pages for a good reason for this.  :)
- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 05:44:49 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Winded

At 07:00 AM 8/21/97 +0000, you wrote:

>Here's what happened.  A PC shot a bad guy in the chest with a 
>shotgun (we're using Glenn Grant's hit location chart).  The bad guy 
>was wearing diplo under his long coat.  The shotgun did not 
>penetrate, and I applied 2 points of blunt trauma damage since the 
>armor is flexible.
>
>Here's where the controversey came in.
>
>If you get shot in the chest--I don't care if you are wearing some 
>type of balliistic armor like diplo--the shit hurts!  It is still 
>like getting hit in the chest with a sledge hammer,and it will 
>probably wind you and knock you down real fast.

In TACS he would have lost 5 AP immediately due to being wounded.  This is
a good simulation of the sudden shock of being hit.

I'm still trying to find a good rule for knock-down for v2.2.. dmage
exceeds DEX?  END?  I want to avoid another task roll at that point.
- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 06:10:40 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Phil Foglio

At 10:57 AM 8/25/97 -0400, you wrote:

>I remember one about "Exercises for gamers"
>1. put cinder blocks all over your body, this refelects how heavy most 
>armour is.
>2. put pots and pans all over you, and try to sneek past the neighbors dog, 
>this is about how it is like to sneek past a monster in full armour.
>3. Extra Credit -- Strap 20 Cats to you and take a cold shower, this is 
>about how much dammage one recieves in an average round of combat!
>
>Trying to come up with some Traveller flavored ones...
>1.  Hump head first in a lava pit.  This is about how it feels to be hit 
>with a PGMP-15!
>2.  Try using a TRS-80 Computer to calculate theoretical physics.  This is 
>what it feels like to be an astrogator on a starship(Classic Trav)
>
>Any others? :)

You had to ask.

3. Recieve one session of chemotherapy.  This is equivalnat to breathing on
the average "tainted" atmosphere world.

4. Ride the local roller coaster for one hour.  This simulates riding from
the Starport to the local settlement in an open air/raft.

5. Lock yourself in your room with no phone and the windows taped over for
a week, drinking nausea inducing medicine.  This simulates jump travel.

Yes, when this list is complete, I'll want it for the Silly Era...
- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 05:55:57 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Blowthrough

At 10:19 AM 8/25/97 -0400, you wrote:
>
>Quote the Action System:
>
>Blowthrough.
>
>The maximum damage done by melee weapons, slug throwers, laser, and
>fragments is based on the mass of the target:
>
>Mass        Maximum Damage
>1-25kg         1D6
>26-50kg        2D6
>51-100kg       3D6
>101-200kg      4D6
>
>So it will, statistically speaking, require 4 blows from a battle axe to
>kill a rabbit?

Spend APs to aim.  Roll an increased damage hit.  Whatever dama ge get
through the bunny fur is multiplied by 2 or 3.  This gives a rang of damage
from 2-12 to 3-18.  Assuming a rabbit weighs at most three kg, that gives
about 3/3 hits.  Splat.

Or, spend APs to increase damage.  Since this makes the task more
difficult, I'd suggest doing this when you've caught Bugs, and have him on
the chopping block.

>"and it has great Huuuuuuge fangs"

Ah.  You've been to Capon/Lunion!

>Please, lose the blowthrough rule. It is a nice idea but just does not seem
>to work on the scale of the T4 combat system because, simply put, it IS
>harder to kill a bear with a shotgun than it would be to kill a rabbit

Just to be picky, bears have a nice layer of fat that would provide Armor
1.  also, a bear's hits are going to be much higher.  And I have seen
rabbits take hits from M-16A1 fire and run away.  Strange universe out there.
>
>
- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 06:24:13 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: TACS- some observations

At 09:17 AM 8/25/97 -0500, you wrote:

>        All of my experience in combat is in the areas of hand-to-hand and
>melee, and with your background you may have a wealth of experience to
>contradict me in terms of firefights, but it has been my observation that
>intelligence (or sharp wits, if you prefer), not dexterity, is the prime
>determining factor in combat initiative.  Combat encounters happen very,
>very quickly, and the challenge for a combatant is to process a huge amount
>of information about his surroundings, opponent's actions, etc., determine a
>course of action, and then act upon it.  The reason why inexperienced people
>sometimes "freeze up" in combat is due to information overload- the mind is
>overwhelmed by the sudden deluge of information (and a healthy dose of
>terror).  Thus, I suggest that INT+(applicable skill) be used as the sole
>determinant of initiative.

I considered that, but experience has shown that while the spirit is
willing, the flesh is sometimes slow.  The number of times I got caught in
trainin gsimply because I couldn't bring my rifle around fast enough...
It's part of the reason I volunteered to be a sniper, I much prefer having
the luxury of firing first from a hiden position.

>        I would suggest modifying this passage to "Because of the extreme
>danger suppressive fire causes anyone attempting to enter or act within the
>Beaten Zone must succeed at the following task:"  This is to cover
>situations where someone lays down suppressing fire at enemy forces under
>cover, attempting to keep the opponents' collective heads down and restrict
>enemy return fire.  Does this make sense?

Perfectly.  Consider it done.

>Shock and Surprise:
>
>Whenever a combatant is shot at by a previously undetected opponent, he
>loses 1D6 APs immediately.  He cannot take any actions until this loss oc=
>curs.
>
>If a group is ambushed, and is caught completely off-guard, all combatant=
>s
>on the surprised side are at half AP for the first round of combat.

I'm trying to keep it on a one to one basis, and avoid group reactions.  If
a group is moving into an ambush zone, and fails to see the bad guys, then
those baddies are all goinjg to get a chance to shoot while the characters
are exposed.  This will result in everybody twitching.  I may rewrite the
rule to something like the following:

When combatants come under fire from a previously undetected opponent, all
combatants within 3m of the line of fire lose 1D6 AP immediately.

Work better for you?

>Morale:
>
>Morale is a nebulous factor in role-playing games.  All too often,
>non-player characters fight to the last individual against hopeless odds.
>
>As a rule of thumb, most sane combatants will not stay when it is obvious
>that they are completely out-gunned.  Also, if it is apparent that one si=
>de
>is losing, members of that side will tend to retreat.
>
>        To muddy this issue slightly, there are situations where things
>happen so fast that a group doesn't realize how many losses they have taken
>until well after the fact.  (There's nothing quite like the feeling of being
>amid a horde of your own troops in a field battle, rushing up to the enemy
>and fighting away- and then realizing, moments later, that while you were
>concentrating on killing the guy in front of you the rest of your force was
>wiped out and you are now completely surrounded.)  I would suggest that the
>GM make some sort of INT+Tactics (modified by AP) check for the enemy forces
>at the end of each combat round to see how well they are assessing the
>overall situation.  Some opponents might fight on because they don't grasp
>that their situation has become untenable.

Perhaps making it explicitly clear that during the final phase of the round
NPCs must make any necessary morale checks?  If you have an idea for a
*quick* NPC morale system that uses tasks, I'd love to see it.  Ideally, it
should take one roll to determine moral status.

Thanks for the feedback.
- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 08:44:17 -0600
From: Glenn Hoppe <starcity@sk.sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: T4.1 Skills, Craftsman

Glenn Grant wrote:
> 
> Marc,
> 
> [I'm not posting this to the list because I know it would just cause a
> stupid flamewar...]

well, you cc'd us... :->

> Can you rename "Craftsman" in T4.1? It rankles every time I read it. Many
> of my characters are not men (sometimes not even human) so why use this
> term when there are gender-free alternatives? (Imagine how you'd feel if
> our cultural default concepts were reversed, and you were often called "a
> great 'craftswoman' of game design"?)

Agreed. No need for this. Reading "Craftsman" in T4 made me feel icky.

> Call it "Handicraft", "Craftwork", or "Fabrication". (Or "Craftsophont" for
> that matter :)

What about "Artisan"? This is what TNE called a similar skill, iirc.

Marc could you change this please?


- -- Glenn Hoppe

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 08:18:47 -0700
From: Chris Griffen <cgriffen@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: Solomani TL

Bruce Alan Macintosh wrote:

>That prettu much summarizes his arguments. Conflicting theories - that the
>Imperium was barely TL-15 in 1000, with no TL-15 military forces, and that
>the Solomani were lagging behind, unsurprisingly given that they had been
>seperate for a hundred years or so and had a smaller industrial base and a
>repressive society and hence were low TL-14, even Terra, at the time of the
>Rim War - are clearly not to be considered, even though it is practically
>an axiom of Traveller that the Imperium is the leading technological
>civilization of its era (with the possible exception of the Hivers.)

*This* is the main point that Leroy, I believe, does not agree with.

That the Imperium, for good or ill, is established as *the* main power in
the Traveller universe. If not, the Solomani would have won the SR War and
the face of Traveller would have been completely different.

In an effort to make the game non-Terracentric, the creators of CT and MT
made the Solomani weaker. You have to get behind this or you make your
campaign a variant of what the original writers of Traveller intended.

I think it's obvious to most Traveller players that this was the intention
of the game and that the Solomani were TL 14 because they were simply not
as advanced as the Imperium.

Best,

Chris Griffen

===================================================
Keeper of the Flame. Traveller player since 1980.

http://www.cris.com/~Cgriffen/traveller/deneb.shtml


- --------------------------------------------------------------
Christopher Griffen                      Phone: (408) 527-7189
Cisco Systems, Inc.                      Fax:   (408) 527-0452
NMBU Technical Publications              cgriffen@cisco.com

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 08:32:53 -0700
From: Chris Griffen <cgriffen@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: Solomani TL

Leroy William Lu Guatney wrote:

>Chris Griffen, this is the beautiful elegance I told you about before.
>Thanks for waiting, as well as all the "help".  I owed you one until
>recently, if you get my drift. ;-)

You'll have to forgive me, the short term memory is slipping. What exactly
are you referring to? (Perhaps I won't receive an answer to this since
Leroy signed off from the TML at the bottom.)

>Since the Imperium only reached TL15 in 1000, and the Solomani had gone
>it alone since 871, then the TI did not make Terra TL15 with the Imperium's
>help, and this is consistent with other knowledge.  Given that this view is
>consistent with the Martian Terraforming project of 395, the Terrans have
>been Common TL15 all through the pre-TI contact period of the planet's
>history.

You have to remember: the Martian Terraforming project of 395 is *still NOT
done* in 1120. So, any argument that states Terra was TL 15 for much longer
falls flat. Any TL-12+ world can *attempt* to terraform. They have the
basic concepts. But like Icarus with his wings or Howard Hughes with the
Spruce Goose, it will fail and fall to Earth. And that's exactly what the
Terrans did: fail. Even in 1120 with Imperial TL-15 technology, they
haven't finished the project. So, it stands to reason that Terra probably
was at *TL 14* during the SR War and only reached TL 15 *after* the
Imperial occupation in 990.

>Acceptance of this kind of information trying evaluate/analyze the game
>eventually comes down to a few plausible views.  There is no reason that
>one is better than any other in the end.  We have all had good ideas for
>an intentional/unintentional departure from the "canon", and I contend that
>it is the quality of the writing, and reasonableness of the arguments, that
>when we get a new Traveller book, we are persuaded to accept it into a
>constantly modified and updated view of our own "canons" (sp?).

I'd agree that no one is "better." Everyone should be able to do whatever
they want in their campaigns. No pile of Traveller books should be able to
dictate otherwise. But the greater evidence indicates an RoM of TL 12 and a
Rim War TL 14. So if you're arguing canon, I don't see how you can
effectively refute this.

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

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1749
***********************************
Traveller-digest      Tuesday, August 26 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1750



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

TNE Petition
Rob's World Worksheet on CORE
Re: TACS- some observations
Re: Marc's Comments on Skill Levels (was Re: Brokers)
Re: FF&S2 HELP!
Re:Femicide - already happened
Re: Winded
Re: TACS- some observations
Boredom and homicidal insanity in Traveller
Re: Winded
Military Scout Vehicle (TL9)
Re: Grandfather's kids and grandkids
Re: Task Resolution
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1741
Re: Boredom and homicidal insanity in Traveller
FF&S2
Re: RoM/Terra TL (TL15)
Winded
Re: Task Resolution
Re: Cartoon Nostalgia

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 16:16:34 PDT
From: Eamon Watters <E.Watters@Queens-Belfast.AC.UK>
Subject: TNE Petition

                                                                                                                
Hello,

I've been an avid fan of Traveller since I was 
introduced to it, via TNE, in 1993. I got every 
supplement I could lay my hands on, and each was a 
joy to read. When GDW went under in 1996 it felt 
like a body blow, no more Traveller, and much less 
fun all around.

When Marc stepped in to save Traveller I was 
overjoyed, and was even happier to see my beloved 
TNE mentioned as a possible Milleau in the T4 
rulebook. 

It has been a year now, and there appears to be no 
hope of seeing a TNE Milleau, so I have organized 
this petition to ask for a TNE wrap-up book. 
Basically I'd like to see a reasonably-sized book, 
64pages+, explaining where the TNE Universe was 
going, what secrets would have been revealed, and 
the adventures that would have revealed them. CT 
fans had a conclusion to their milleau with the 
Rebellion, MT fans had the Collapse (like it or 
loathe it), I think TNE fans deserve a conclusion 
to their milleau.

So, If you would like to see such a book, please 
e-mail me a message, with the subject line 'TNE 
Petition', and the body 'I would buy a TNE wrap-up 
book'. The address to send this to is 
'tnepetition@hotmail.com'.

As this is a petition, please do not send me on 
any 'no' votes, this is just to gauge the 
feasibility of such a book. 

Thank you,

Eamon Watters.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 17:27:10 +0100
From: Jo_Grant/DUB/Lotus@lotus.com
Subject: Rob's World Worksheet on CORE

Yo Folks,
     Rob's World Worksheet for Pocket Empires is now being hosted on CORE's
web pages. Go to http://members.nova.org/~sol/core and follow the links to
the Download page.
     Cheers,
          Jo

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 10:01:10 -0700
From: kenji@accessone.com (Kenji Schwarz)
Subject: Re: TACS- some observations

Doug Berry wrote:

[near-total snip]

>  Ideally, it
>should take one roll to determine moral status.

Ah, but it does!  It all depends on who you roll WITH, ya know? <G>

Kenji Schwarz
kenji@accessone.com

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 97 18:05 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: Marc's Comments on Skill Levels (was Re: Brokers)

In-Reply-To: <970823212713_1058716273@emout03.mail.aol.com>

> And that's why advenced character generation for T4 will be more concerned
> with life events and reasons why the chargen went the way it did than with
> giving the character more skills.

If you make chargen task-based, that gives you 4 possible results for each 
step (SpecFail, Fail, Success, SpecSuccess). For each result, you could then 
roll on a table to see what happened.

eg roll for promotion, get SF. Roll on the Promotion SF table, discover that 
your superior hated you (why is for the player to decide).
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 10:26:11 -0700 (PDT)
From: Craig Berry <cberry@cinenet.net>
Subject: Re: FF&S2 HELP!

> Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 17:11:29 -0700
> From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
> 
> At 03:31 PM 8/24/97 -0400, you wrote:
> 
> >*** 1.)  Table 212: Food Storage.  Does the volume include the amount of
> >food, or is it in addition to the amount of food?  For example:  If I have
> >2m3 of food at TL8, do I need an extra 2.4m3 for storage, or do I need 2.4m3
> >total for storage in which the food is fitted?  (2m3 for the food, plus 0.4m3
> >extra for the refrigiration, shelves, etc.).
> 
> At the bottom of the table it states "All values are per cubic meter of
> storage capacity needed."  So i'd say that your example is correct, you do
> need the extra space.  (Shelving, refrigeration units, etc..)

Not clear what you mean by this; my interpretation is that in the example,
a 2.4 m3 TL-8 refridgerator will store 2 m3 of food internally; in other
words, the food space is included in the 2.4 m3 volume.  This seems both
reasonable and consistent with the actual TL-8 refridgerator in my
kitchen. :)

> >*** 2.)  What is the volume of an individual workstation or crewstation?
> > That is:  Is it the volume & mass of a seat + the mass of the workstation
> >from the table in the book, or what?  I know that there is errata for the
> >control system, but I mean JUST the volume for the workstations and
> >crewstations (how can I figure out how big a bridge I need if I don't have
> >the volume of the crew/workstations?).
> 
> It's workstation plus the seat.

Plus the volume around both; that's probably more than half of the total
volume cost (though none of the mass).  Work/crewstations need lots of
empty space so you can get into and out of them, walk between them, and so
forth. 

- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
   |   Craig Berry - cberry@cinenet.net
 --*--    Home Page: http://www.cinenet.net/users/cberry/home.html
   |      Member of The HTML Writers Guild: http://www.hwg.org/   
       "Every man and every woman is a star."

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 12:05:27 -0700 (PDT)
From: "John R. Snead" <jsnead@netcom.com>
Subject: Re:Femicide - already happened

s.johnson107@genie.com wrote:

Jo_Grant/DUB/Lotus@lotus.com Wrote...
>> Yo Folks,

>> Based on evidence in Scandinavian graveyards they, too, practiced
>> selective female infanticide and ended up with a gender ratio of 7 or
>> 8 to 1! Far more pronounced than we are currently seeing. The result?
>> Well, large bands of angry young men roaming from as far as Nova
>> Scotia to Byzantium.

>> PS: I can cite the references for this if anyone want to read further
>> on it.

>    Please!  While the Viking era isn't my favorite in history, the
>implications are something I'm interested it. ;)

Agreed.  I've never heard of this and would be *very* interested in
hearing the sources of this data, sounds like fascinating (if rather 
chilling) research.

Thanks-


- -John Snead jsnead@netcom.com

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 15:05:11 -0400
From: Mark Urbin <eclipse@ultranet.com>
Subject: Re: Winded

"RFXn" <mlaakso@utu.fi> writes:
>On 21 Aug 97 at 7:00, Kenneth Bearden wrote:
><largish snip>
>> Am I being too harsh here?  Or do you think this is a good roll?
>	I'd say that sounds just about right. Just remember _nodoby_ gets 
>thrown back by a shotgun blast (except in bad Hollywood films), a 
>rolling bowling ball has something like 20 times the energy of 
>12-gauge buckshot at close range.
>	Unless of course the shotgun fires miniature thruster pellets.. :)

   A little simple physics here.  For a shotgun blast to throw the
human massed target back, the human massed firer would also get thrown
back.  

   The reaction of the body to the traumatic wound, in the way of
muscle spasms, causes most of the movement by the target's body.

   Manufacturers of bullet resistant vests have done demos where someone
wearing one of their vests (typically the CEO, talk about faith in your
product!) stands on one leg and is shot by large handguns (.45 caliber
for example).  They don't fall down.  They waver, wobble, and clench
their teeth though. :-)


- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
eclipse@ultranet.com http://www.ultranet.com/~eclipse/ #insert <disclaimer.h>
      Smith&Wesson -- The Ultimate "Point & Click" User interface.
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
- --

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 14:45:03 -0500 (CDT)
From: lee@uansv2.Vanderbilt.Edu (Mike Lee)
Subject: Re: TACS- some observations

>At 09:17 AM 8/25/97 -0500, Doug Berry wrote:
>
>> Thus, I suggest that INT+(applicable skill) be used as the sole
>>determinant of initiative.
>
>I considered that, but experience has shown that while the spirit is
>willing, the flesh is sometimes slow.  The number of times I got caught in
>trainin gsimply because I couldn't bring my rifle around fast enough...
>It's part of the reason I volunteered to be a sniper, I much prefer having
>the luxury of firing first from a hiden position.

        I see your point.  Ultimately, your idea of using DEX or INT and
leaving the call up to the GM to make covers all the bases and allows for
situational flexibility, so my point was kind of moot in the first place.
>
>>Shock and Surprise:

>I'm trying to keep it on a one to one basis, and avoid group reactions.  If
>a group is moving into an ambush zone, and fails to see the bad guys, then
>those baddies are all goinjg to get a chance to shoot while the characters
>are exposed.  This will result in everybody twitching.  I may rewrite the
>rule to something like the following:
>
>When combatants come under fire from a previously undetected opponent, all
>combatants within 3m of the line of fire lose 1D6 AP immediately.
>
>Work better for you?

        I see what you mean about group reactions, and I think your
modification to the rule is very effective.  Works for me.
>
>>Morale:

>Perhaps making it explicitly clear that during the final phase of the round
>NPCs must make any necessary morale checks?  If you have an idea for a
>*quick* NPC morale system that uses tasks, I'd love to see it.  Ideally, it
>should take one roll to determine moral status.
>
        Hmmm... Okay, how about this:
        At the end of the turn, take the NPC with the highest Tactics and
make an INT+Tactics roll.  In the absence of Tactics, use only INT.  The
difficulty of the task can be determined by the NPCs' overall
experience/training level (i.e. Elite troops might make a routine check
where Green or untrained troops might have to make a formidable check).  The
target number can be modified by AP's.  If the morale check is successful,
the NPC's continue to fight on.  If the NPC's fail the roll by no more than
2, they are considered to be pinned down, and must spend AP's on the
following turn seeking immediate cover.  If they fail the roll by 3, the NPC
are shaken and must retreat.  If they fail the roll by more than 3, the
NPC's rout, fleeing the area in panic.  Critical failure results in the
NPC's throwing down their arms and surrendering on the spot.
        The target number for the morale roll could be further modified by
the following conditions, if the GM wanted to go into detail:

        25% casualties: -1
        50% casualties: -2
        75% casualties: -3
        76%+ casualties: -4

        Subjected to sniper fire: -2
        Subjected to suppression fire: -3
        Subjected to grenades/heavy autofire: -4

        NPC's pinned in previous turn: -3
        NPC's retreating in previous turn: -4
        NPC's routed in previous turn: -5

        In the first turn of a successful ambush, the target number is halved.

        All of these conditions are cumulative.  For instance, let's say
that a group of NPC pirates board the player's ship, walk into the commons
area, and are subjected to a withering hail of autofire coming from three
different passageways.  Half the pirates are cut to pieces in the first few
moments.  The group leader has INT-8 and Tactics-2, and the overall
experience level for the pirates is veteran (average difficulty on morale
checks).  At the end of the turn, the GM makes a morale check for the NPC's.
The target number is 10, minus 2 for 50% casualties, minus 4 for heavy
autofire.  The result is 4, but since the NPC's have just been subjected to
a successful ambush, the target number is further halved to just 2!  If the
group leader has AP's remaining, he can increase the target number
(essentially trying to rally his men while under fire), or else there is a
very good chance that the pirates will be pinned down, or possibly flee the
area in panic.  If the PC's elected to pursue the pirates, the GM could
continue to make morale checks at the end of every round to see if they get
their courage back.
        Hope this at least gives you something you can begin with.

Mike Lee

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 16:08:30 -0400
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: Boredom and homicidal insanity in Traveller

Glenn Crawford wrote:

[snip]
>
>And while I am already ranting, T4 needs some kind of sanity/morale system.
>Teach the players to not murder people, and avoid excessive combat. It also
>deals wiith the "sure, my character can handle having no leave for 2 years
>as I travel from one end of the Imperium to the other without going mad from
>boredom"


	Hm.  Maybe the players are simulating the effects of the boredom
already... by murdering people over too big an olive in their martinis?

	Cause you also forgot another Trav mental health failing; the
alcoholism (spaceport bars have far too important a role in the game, IMHO)
:).


Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 20:37:04 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: Winded

> In TACS he would have lost 5 AP immediately due to being wounded.  This is
> a good simulation of the sudden shock of being hit.

Believe it or not, in the above situation, we were using a T4 tweaked 
version of Snapshot!

Kenneth.

------------------------------

Date: 26 Aug 1997 20:54:56 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Military Scout Vehicle (TL9)

Military Scout Vehicle (TL9)
Designed by Robert Prior

Summary:
     1.00 displacement ton box;  5.41 tonnes;  kCr 358
Chassis:
     14.0 kL box (3.7 m long x 1.9 m wide x 1.9 m high);  Structure: 337 kg
of composite laminate, body 0.01 cm thick
     Armour: 4 front (0.14 cm, moderate slope), 4 sides (0.14 cm, moderate
slope), 4 rear (0.14 cm, moderate slope), 1 top (0.01 cm), 1 bottom (0.01 cm)
Performance:
     1.00 MW TL8 Turbine, MHD power plant;  Fuel: 1.00 kL of high-grade hcarb
(1.00 tonnes), 10 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 1.00 MW hoverskirt with fan filters;  Maximum Speed:
166 km/h;  Range: 1662 km;  Agility: +3DM
Crew:
     Crew roster: driver, sensor operator, gunner;  3 crew stations
Armament:
     Weapon                          Damage    Range          Shots   
Reloads   Notes
     Missile, AT-8                   33 (21 expShort          1       1      
  +4DM, remote
     Machinegun, Medium-8            5         Long           200     5      
  +4DM, remote
Communications:
     Regional Radio (1.00 kW, TL9, SmVcl, MilSpec)
Sensors:
     Active Regional Radar (1.00 kW, MilSpec, DispArray)  Resolution: 5.0 mm
per km of range
     Active Subregional Lidar (100 W, MilSpec, DispArray)  Resolution: 1.0 mm
per km of range
Other:
     5.76 L of cargo space


Designed with CSC (software Robert Prior, 1997)

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 23:15:53 +0100
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: Re: Grandfather's kids and grandkids

>>Volker A. Greimann writes:
>>>Grandfather "designed" his children so that their brains didn't work
>>>in the directions of multiplying, cloning and the like! Their brains
>>>were not capable of thinking in that direction: Thus, none of the
>>>children could clone themselves! (As i remember!)
>
>I believe you misremember. As far as I recall the subject was never mentioned
>anywhere. What was mentioned, however, was that Yaskodray had 20 children
>(actually, clones, since they were exact duplicates of him) himself and that
>each of the kids had "about 20" childern themselves. So the kids, at the
>very least, was capable of cloning themselves.

That was part of my handwave/explanation for why the grandchildren didn't
multiply themseleves during final war (it last several thousand years
remember) to kill granddaddy off.
My PCs are keeping a badly rad damagaed grandchild alive in the freezer
getting really perplexed/puzzled as to why they cannot despite getting help
from Droynes fro  Five Sisters clone new tissue nor can they get any
coherent responses about this issue from the Droyne grandchild.
(Actually that happened a while back - now they run pretty scared as they
have killed off Yaskoydroy himself and destroyed all ports to his pocket
universe at least that's what they think))


/Anders Backman
Aniware AB
anders.backman@aniware.se

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 14:21:06 -0700
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

Fri, 22 Aug 1997 10:21:35 +0000, "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
>> Why is it this debate seems to come up every two months or so? Must be
>> something in the water. Oh well.

>Because there is a problem in T4.1, and most of us would like to see
>it fixed before the book is printed--even if we all don't agree (and
>we don't) on how it should be fixed.

Well...
a) That there is a problem is a matter of opinion.
b) That a majority want it "fixed" is also debatable.

All, you can say is that there is vocal faction.  Your
posts alone do a lot to keep the debate going.  The fact
that it keeps getting raised doesn't prove it's right or
popular anymore than similar controversies proved that
most people knew that Vincent Foster was murdered.

_______________________________________________________________
DSummers@Mail.ARC.NASA.gov

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 21:34:39 GMT
From: jeff.zeitlin@earth.execnet.com (Jeff Zeitlin)
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1741

On Sun, 24 Aug 1997 14:44:09 -0400, SemoFetus@aol.com wrote:

>Subject: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations
>
>In a campaign I am working on (hybrid Trav) I have an interesting =
dilemna.
>I have two subsectors mapped out (I am playing in the standard CT world,
>Imperium c. 1100), and in these two subsectors I have two VERY long
>mains (jump one trade routes).  One wraps around one subsector and
>through the other and back into the first, and the other goes more or =
less
>straight across both subsectors width-wise.
>
>Now, when I connected the two subsectors together and saw the two
>huge mains, visions of Free Trader unions danced in my head,
>massive subsector wide lines as well.  I loved it.  One problem is,
>though, that on one of the mains, there is a very low tech world lacking
>both starport and gas giant.  ie.  dead end.
>
>In trying to figure out a way around this, I thought about a calibration
>point much like the ones from the TNE Regency sourcebook.  When
>I looked for a location, this seemed too perfect because the logical
>place for the calibration point would connect both of the mains,
>thus roughly doubling the amount of worlds that can be reached by
>a J-1 trader...

Well, not a "calibration point", more like a "deep station".  I
tend to think of CPs as being _strictly_ military items.

>My dilemna is:  Is there a source for rough prices of starports?  I
>think I saw some discussion a little while back.  In addition, the
>other dilemna is, since I am using FF&S2 manuever drives, would
>they work?  The Comet or Iceteroid wouldn't be huge like a star or
>anything.  I hope that manuever drives DON'T work here, because=20
>I've just gotten visions of HEPlaR tug boats pulling ships out to 100=20
>diameters of the comet.

I suppose you could use Pocket Empires for that, although it
doesn't directly address the construction of deep stations.

My "gut feel" for this would be:  If you find a rogue planet
(i.e., rock or rock/ice ball of size 1 or better), costs to
construct a deep station on it would be twice the normal costs
for a starport of equivalent capabilities. (i.e., to build a
class A deep station would cost 6242.4 RU Equivalent, and take
126 years)  If you can't find a rogue planet, and must accept a
cold comet (ice or ice/rock ball of size S or smaller), triple
the costs but only double the time; if you are in real trouble,
and have to build the platform from zero, quadruple costs and
double time.  With a rogue planet, thrusters can be used by
visiting ships, but close and dispersed structures can't use the
port (unless you also build an orbital component - double cost of
ground component if ground component already exists, triple if
not); on a cold comet or zero base, thrusters can't be used
(HEPlaR tugs required), but close and dispersed structures can
use the port.

Operating costs would be twice those of a port based in a system,
and prices of all goods and services would be at least twice
normal.

- --=20
Jeff Zeitlin
jeff.zeitlin@earth.execnet.com

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 15:22:21 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mark Ayers <mark@bbic.com>
Subject: Re: Boredom and homicidal insanity in Traveller

> Glenn Crawford wrote: 
> [snip]
> And while I am already ranting, T4 needs some kind of sanity/morale system.
> Teach the players to not murder people, and avoid excessive combat. It also
> deals wiith the "sure, my character can handle having no leave for 2 years
> as I travel from one end of the Imperium to the other without going mad from
> boredom"

The T4 sanity/morale system is in place. I call it the referee. A player
drawn to excessive violence will eventually be roleplaying a body bag or
from a deep space maximum security prison facility. As for boredom it's
the referee's role to stop either real world or game world boredom.
[unles,s of course, game world boredom is the build-up to some great
mindless violence.

#include<iostream> // SPAM is illegal
int main(void) {	
    cout << "Net Admin for the Book and Bean Internet Cafe\tadmin@bbic.com\n";
    cout << "Traveller referee for Metro Seattle Gamers\tmark@bbic.com\n";
    return (8);
}

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 19:35:48 -0400 (EDT)
From: tconnor@pop3.utoledo.edu (Tim Connors)
Subject: FF&S2

Questions concerning FF&S2:

        1. I cannot find Table 185: Control Systems (referenced on page 72).

        2. The information on the "Wedge" configuration appears to be
missing/incorrect on Table 160: Hull Shape Modifiers.

        3. Do Bridge/Normal Workstations require seats?

        4. Do Open/Cramped Crewstations require seats?

        5. Are G-tanks required for workstations in order to allow
additional            acceleration without negative task modifiers? Are
seats still required (if            they ever were)?

        6. Is there really any excuse for "<-->?"

        Answers/Tables would be greatly appreciated as my design program has
come
        to a shuffling halt and my spreadsheets all say "DIV!0" and "REF#"
and other          unkind things (who wants that kind of treatment from a
machine -- and one that         doesn't have the latest upgrades, at that!).

        For questions 3, 4, and 5 an extensive and specific answer would
really be         appreciated.

        Thanks, in advance.

Tim Connors

Don't lose heart
     . . . someone might want to cut it out
           . . . and they'd like to avoid a lengthy search.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 20:11:58 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: Re: RoM/Terra TL (TL15)

Leroy William Lu Guatney writes:

>>   It is entirely consistent for Terra to be early TL 15 in 1000, TL 11
>>during the Long Night, TL 12 during the RoM, and TL 10-12 during the
>>Interstellar Wars.
>
>Well, not really Harold, but _that_ is an entirely different discussion.

   Only because you keep insisting that Traveller canon be
warped/altered/broken to fit the concept you have for your MMT writing
project.  Go ahead and write what you like Leroy, afterall as I have
pointed out here in the past, MMT is not Traveller.  

   Admitting that MMT is inspired by, and borrows heavily from the
originial material, *but* is not part of the original CT/MT/TNE
storyline family will save you *hours* of useless analysis (a number of
us hours of useless replies), and doesn't involve the altering or
breaking of anything.

   Not that I'm speaking for Marc Miller (he can speak for himself), but
it seems to me he would rather you concentrate on writing good material
that is sellable to the public, and worry about canon controversy and
long-winded justifications last.

   That said...

>We have absolutely proved that Terra was TL14 (CT) and a _very_ reasonable
>assertion for the possibility of TL15 at the outset of the Rim War.  Given
>the MT +1 DM to CT sources, Terra was TL15 (MT) at the outset of the Rim
>War.

   As the person who originally theorized that Terra *may* have been TL
15 (early TL 15), let me state for the record that your "MT +1 TL
theory" holds about as much water as a paper bag.

   It was the original intent of the writers of the game that the
Imperium's enemies be about a TL behind.  At the same time we see a TL
15 Zhodane and a few TL 15 worlds in some of the DGP's generated sectors
for the Solomani Confederation (data I would argue that is extremely
suspect because of all the known flaws), we see TL 16 worlds opping up
in the Imperium.  Game balance (and original intent) remained.

>Since the Imperium only reached TL15 in 1000, and the Solomani had gone
>it alone since 871, then the TI did not make Terra TL15 with the Imperium's
>help, and this is consistent with other knowledge.  Given that this view is
>consistent with the Martian Terraforming project of 395, the Terrans have
>been Common TL15 all through the pre-TI contact period of the planet's history.

   That being the case, Sylea must also have been TL 15 all through the
pre-TI period of history, since it was TL 15 in 1000.  In fact, all this
Long Night stuff was just a bunch of rubbish designed as an alien plot
against the true humans of the Solomani race!

   Seriously, I can't believe that somebody would reach that kind of
conclusion based upon what is at best a *theory*.  I certainly wouldn't
go there without more support than a terraforming project about which we
have *no* details (like what TL it was attempted at).

>Of course, both sides of this whole discussion have been riddled with
>assumptions.  The material is vague, and as my earlier post pointed out,
>we have room for any RoM TL, 12-16.  If T4 says it was "known maximum" of
>15, that is _perfectly_ good enough for me.  Afterall, canon _really_ is what
>we want it to be--nothing else.

   See my comments on MMT vs. Traveller above.  As for those that follow
Traveller canon, the material is pretty straight forward.  If sitting
around the game table at home you want it to be something else, then go
for it.

>If someone wants to point out that the TI was TL14 in 700, just before the
>formation of the Solomani Autonomous Region, then we have a major threat to
>the canonist movement, and we can't have that, now can we. :) 

   If somewhere in the books it says the Imperium achieved TL 14 in 700
(and I'm not going to bother looking it up--it's irrelevant) that would
be fine.  If it doesn't, and we don't know, then so be it.

   I'm sorry if your ideas don't agree with what is generally accepted
as canon Leroy.  But you have to understand that there are others here
on TML that have been playing Traveller for just as long as you have and
have reached a different conclusion based on literary evidence and not
on wishful thinking.  Something to ponder I suppose as you appear to be
ready to throw in the towel.

Regards,

Harold

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 19:27:17 +0000
From: Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com>
Subject: Winded

> > In TACS he would have lost 5 AP immediately due to being wounded.  This is
> > a good simulation of the sudden shock of being hit.
> 
> Believe it or not, in the above situation, we were using a T4 tweaked
> version of Snapshot!
> 
> Kenneth.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 19:33:52 +0000
From: Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

David P. Summers wrote:
> All, you can say is that there is vocal faction.  Your
> posts alone do a lot to keep the debate going.  The fact
> that it keeps getting raised doesn't prove it's right or
> popular anymore than similar controversies proved that
> most people knew that Vincent Foster was murdered.

Why do you have to go and be a butt?  You asked a simple question.  I
gave you a simple, polite answer, and you decide that it is time to cut
somebody down for answering you question.

I didn't start anything with you.  I only answered your question.  Don't
ask questions, get answers (or opinions), and then jump on somebody for
answering your question in the first place.

That's just plain being snotty.

Kenneth.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 17:20:40 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Cartoon Nostalgia

In mail you write:

>
>         Yup, I remember that one.  One of my fave cartoons ever done in a
> TSR publications was one of those color strips in the back of Dragon
> magazine, where they were expounding on the differences between fantasy and
> SF rpgs, like where weapons come from ("Forged 10,000 years ago on the
> battleground of Z'Blnith, this wand..."/"This blaster?  Sears.  23.95 on
> sale.") and so forth.  Anyone remember it?
>
> It was Phil Foglio's What's New, explaining the dif between fantasy and SF

The collected "What's New" were printed in a single volume 5-10 years
ago. I've got a copy somewhere.

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1750
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, August 27 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1751



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Winded
Re: What I'd like to see--Task Resolution
Re: Task Resolution
Re: TL of Terra/Solomani in the Rim War (summary for those tired of it)
Re: TACS- some observations
Re: Air Slug!!
RE: Blowthrough
re: TNE Book for T4
Re: RoM/Terra TL (Occam)
Re: Winded
Re: What I'd like to see--Task Resolution
Re: Task Resolution
Re: Task Resolution
Famille Spofulam review: Event Horizon.
RE: Starship gravity control
Re: Boredom and homicidal insanity in Traveller
Re: Task Resolution
Re: Task Resolution
Re: Winded
Skill Maintainence
Fusion+, fuel and stuff
Re: FF&S2

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 22:42:07 -0800
From: Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca>
Subject: Re: Winded

>Our NPC did not make his Dex check, and the force of the shotgun
>blast blew him into the wall before he crumpled to the floor.
[snip]
>...just curious about what the rest of you think.

I see a lot of this in movies, and I just don't buy it. Because of the
conservation of momentum the force of getting hit by a shotgun blast is the
same as the force of the gun butt against the firer. Less, actually, since
probably not all the pellets will hit the victim. Yes, this force will be
concentrated in a smaller area so it will hurt more, but it won't be a
greater force. You don't see the firers of weapons zooming around like
low-flying aircraft from recoil, and you won't see their targets doing that
either.

I believe Farley Mowat wrote in his memoirs from WW2 that a person killed
by a bullet simply falls to the ground like a sack of flour. They do not
become airborne, they do not spin or jiggle around like a tap dancer. They
just drop.

- --
Richard Hough
rdhough@orca.bc.ca

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 97 21:08:05 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: What I'd like to see--Task Resolution

On 08/22/97 at 10:49 AM,  "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
said:

>> LOL, that's what I thought you'd say.  Ken I'm afraid you are SOL. Marc, is
>> as unlikely to agree to multiplying skill levels by two as he is to
>> dropping the 1/2 at the difficult level.

>This is sad, but true.  We are doomed to end up with a task system  where
>a level 1 guy can beat a level 4 guy.

Yep, an occasional fluke, but unless the level 4 guy is a true clinker he
should usually win.

>But, I do like a lot of the other things Marc is doing with T4.1.  In 
>spite of this task system blunder, I'm really excited about getting  this
>new book.

Oh, of course.  It's a shame something as important as the task system
isn't going to work for so many of us. 

Eris
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 97 21:10:54 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

On 08/22/97 at 10:49 AM,  "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
said:

>  I asked if you were
>> playing that game..notice the smiley...to give you a chuckle, because I
>> *know* you would never do something like that.

>Oh, gotcha.  Nope.  No hidden agenda here.  I've always been pretty  vocal
>with my agendas--I don't think anybody would argue with that :)

Right, hence the smiley.  Neither of us is known for hiding our feelings on
subjects.  

Eris
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 23:12:44 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: Re: TL of Terra/Solomani in the Rim War (summary for those tired of it)

Bruce Alan Macintosh writes: 

>(4) Only Terra was TL-15 of all the Solomani worlds
>    and losing the war (losing about 1/3 of their territory) traumatized them
>    so much that they forgot how to be TL-15 for a hundred years (possibly
>    because they were too busy evacuating TL-15 troops to evacuate any
>    scientists, engineers, or technical information.)

   Sarcasm aside, it is entirely possible that evacuating Terra
(particularly stripping its industrial base) was considered unthinkable
by the Solomani High Command.  It's also possible that by the time the
decision was made to evacuate (mostly likely after Wolfe's defeat at
Dingir), it was too late.  After all, infrastructure is not exactly an
easily portable item.

Regards,

Harold

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 97 21:08:44 -0600
From: Glenn Hoppe <starcity@sk.sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: TACS- some observations

On 1997-08-26 13:45, Mike Lee <lee@uansv2.Vanderbilt.Edu> posted the 
following:

>>Perhaps making it explicitly clear that during the final phase of the round
>>NPCs must make any necessary morale checks?  If you have an idea for a
>>*quick* NPC morale system that uses tasks, I'd love to see it.  Ideally, it
>>should take one roll to determine moral status.
>>
>        Hmmm... Okay, how about this:
>        At the end of the turn, take the NPC with the highest Tactics and
>make an INT+Tactics roll.  In the absence of Tactics, use only INT.  The

I would use Leadership for morale checks.



- -- 
===== Glenn Hoppe =====\ /--- MailTo:jumpspace@geocities.com ----
\ . . Enter Jumpspace --X-> http://www.geocities.com/Area51/8275 \
 ----------------------/ \========== Eschew Obfuscation ==========

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 97 21:23:48 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: Air Slug!!

On 08/26/97 at 05:47 AM,  "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net> said:

>My bad.  I think the TACS file choked the server.

Strange, I got the entire TACS from the mailing list on the first try,
Introduction, Task List, whole thing.

What makes you think it choked?

Eris
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 97 21:22:10 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: RE: Blowthrough

On 08/26/97 at 06:35 AM,  David Reed <david@techrefuge.com> said:

>> So it will, statistically speaking, require 4 blows from a battle axe to
>> kill a rabbit?

>Why do you apply blowthrough (where'd that name come from? ;-) to 
>non-hydrostatic, low velocity weapons?  

Good question.  The 3d rule wouldn't apply to that battle axe.  

It seems to me that creatures with a low mass would have fewer "hit points"
to absorb than higher mass creatures.  Ok, Traveller isn't using hit
points, as such, but just how strong *is* that bunny? One? What's the
bunny's Endurance?  Two?  Dexterity...well, OK a bunny has pretty good
agility (try catching one that doesn't want to be caught ;-), but it
wouldn't be on the same *scale* as a human sized creature.

If you think this should apply to creatures larger than the bunny, but
smaller than an average human, I agree.  If Vargr average 70% of humans in
mass then is it *possible* their average STR and/or EDU should be closer to
5 than 7?  And if the Aslan average 150% human average (or more) then is it
possible they should *average* 10+?  Just more grist for the mill...;->

>It doesn't apply to battleaxi.

First, beerski and now battleaxi, we're creating our own vocabulary here.
;->

Eris
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 13:19:31 +1000 (EST)
From: "Dave 'Washu' Moodie" <dmoodie@st.nepean.uws.edu.au>
Subject: re: TNE Book for T4

> So, If you would like to see such a book, please 
> e-mail me a message, with the subject line 'TNE 
> Petition', and the body 'I would buy a TNE wrap-up 
> book'. The address to send this to is 
> 'tnepetition@hotmail.com'.

I'd looove to see a follow up book, but it would be nonsensical for IG to
produce 1 book that is completely unrelated to their current product line
at the current time. I think we just need to grit our teeth and bear the
long wait for new TNE backround stuff. A huge Milieu 1201 book - like 164
pages in tiny print (something I loved about TNE, you always got a
lot of words for your money) would suit me fine. No new rules are really
necessary and would be mostly useless to TNE users anyway. 

 						'M.'Dmoodie                  
 
  

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 23:16:14 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: Re: RoM/Terra TL (Occam)

Leroy William Lu Guatney writes:

>   The simplest of all solutions to the whole discussion is what I have
>already pointed out.  Change that one table in the MegaTraveller Referee's
>Companion, pg. 34 to read "JUMP TECH".  There are no other lining outs
>required in the rest of our books, so we don't have to go writing in them.
>
>  That _is_ the simplest of all interpretations.  J.P. is right.  That one
>elegant solution goes a _long_ way to understanding things.  It is compatible
>with _everything_ else, and solves _all_ perceived "problems."

   As has been pointed out by others, there is more evidence of a TL 12
RoM than that one table.

   Losing a debate is never easy, I know from personal experience (just
ask my wife--aka the victor).  You have went to a lot of trouble and
approached your theory from many angles in an attempt to prove it.  Your
effort is not in doubt here--where you fail is in your interpretation of
the facts.

   The RoM of the Traveller universe was a TL 12 society.  TL 12
robotics, TL 12 weapons, and yes TL 12 jump drives.  It is acknowledged
by most that the RoM may have exceeded TL 12 to reach TL 13 in some very
narrow areas, particularly when it came to biotechnology.  Some have
even went to far as to say that some individual worlds (no more than a
few) could be classified as having achieved TL 13 before the RoM
collapsed.

   The RoM of *the MMT universe* appears to have been a higher tech
place.  How much higher depends upon how you interpret the material
presented thus far.

   Spend your time on MMT Leroy.  It desperately needs more in the way
of good writers.

Regards,

Harold

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 97 21:46:11 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: Winded

On 08/26/97 at 03:05 PM,  Mark Urbin <eclipse@ultranet.com> said:

>   A little simple physics here.  For a shotgun blast to throw the human
>massed target back, the human massed firer would also get thrown back.  

Well, I guess you are right for the most part, but...tell you what?  Take a
12 gauge shotgun place the butt firmly against your chest and pull the
trigger. The kick *might* not knock you down, but it won't be a fun
experience, and it will certainly rock you back.

I know from experience that if you aren't braced correctly the kick from a
12 gauge does throw your shoulder back hard! It hurts too. ;-)  I can't
imagine the shot end is less of a kick. OTOH, it wouldn't jerk somebody
back across a room, like in the movies...I don't think.  The only person
I've seen shot with a shotgun got it through the foot (right between the
big and first toe), so blow-back didn't into play...not that I much noticed
at the time.


Eris 
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 13:46:56 +1000 (EST)
From: "Dave 'Washu' Moodie" <dmoodie@st.nepean.uws.edu.au>
Subject: Re: What I'd like to see--Task Resolution

> >But, I do like a lot of the other things Marc is doing with T4.1.  In 
> >spite of this task system blunder, I'm really excited about getting  this
> >new book.
> 
> Oh, of course.  It's a shame something as important as the task system
> isn't going to work for so many of us. 
 
Well, I think the best thing to do is use the TNE or MT systems, both of
which work fine and shouldn't be too hard to paste over the current
system.

(All I want is an error-free rulebook, I've NEVER seen one yet)

 						'M.'Dmoodie                  

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 14:33:46 +1000
From: Jason Anderson <midnight@kagi.com>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

>Why do you have to go and be a butt?  You asked a simple question.  I
>gave you a simple, polite answer

[snip]

Just to jump in here before things heat up a little, I was the one who
asked the question, and I meant it as a retorical question at that. I too
have reservations about the T4.1 task system. However, I should also admit
that I have reservations about KBv2 (personal opinion after running a
campaign using it for 6 months).

Personally I have no idea what the perfect task system would be, if one
exists at all. I expect for each person the perfect task system would be
different (which is why we will never get agreement in this debate).

Regards,
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: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 00:42:06 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

Kenneth Bearden writes:

>David P. Summers wrote:
>> All, you can say is that there is vocal faction.  Your
>> posts alone do a lot to keep the debate going.  The fact
>> that it keeps getting raised doesn't prove it's right or
>> popular anymore than similar controversies proved that
>> most people knew that Vincent Foster was murdered.

   Well actually Vince Foster committed suicide in his office at the
White House, then was later taken to a park outside Washington, D.C.
where his body was found hours later.  The only theory that takes into
account all the facts in the case.

   But enough White House Follies...

>Why do you have to go and be a butt?  You asked a simple question.  I
>gave you a simple, polite answer, and you decide that it is time to cut
>somebody down for answering you question.
>
>I didn't start anything with you.  I only answered your question.  Don't
>ask questions, get answers (or opinions), and then jump on somebody for
>answering your question in the first place.
>
>That's just plain being snotty.

   Civility gentlemen.  Civility if you please.

   Far be it from me to introduce yet more controversy (as you well know
that's not my style  ;-)  ), but on the subject of task resolution in
MMT, wouldn't make more sense to eliminate the so-called "half-dice
controversy" by simply replacing the 1/2 D6 with a D4?  I don't recall
this ever being suggested.  It would certainly make the probability
tables more smooth, people wouldn't have to worry about extra math, and
D4s are pretty much available everywhere MMT is.

   Rational thoughts anyone?

Regards,

Harold

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 00:42:07 -0400
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: Famille Spofulam review: Event Horizon.

	Spoiler Alert!


	The premise of the movie is that in the late 21st century, a ship
is built with a mysterious new gravity drive that opens a "gateway" into
another dimension, from which it can travel instantaneously to anywhere
else in the universe.  On its maiden voyage, it disappears mysteriously,
only to be found seven years later in close orbit around Neptune.

	It seems that the dimension into which it jumped was not your
typical Travelleroid jumpspace, upon which to stare drives strong men mad.
No... it was far, far worse, worse even than inside the studios where
Barney is taped.  What the Event Horizon entered was not just any alternate
dimension.  It could have been any number of interesting places, like
inside the boundless expanse of William Shatner's ego, or, say, Graceland.
But nooooo!  The cretins that wrote this screenplay had the ship enter an
dimension of

	utter,

		limitless,

				infinite,

						_**CHEESE**_!!!!

	Dear god it was awful.  There were some really nice eye candy
moments, and the cast was pretty good, but the ship enters a dimension of
ultimate evil, and the best that it can do is a lame, half-assed Clive
Barker schtick?  Why not have it return to Earth and convince Michael
Jackson to sell the rights to the Beatles' song collection to the...
Backstreet Boys?  Why not have it make Wayne Newton do an album of heavy
metal covers (wups, sorry, no, he's already done that)?  Why not have it
make a movie reuniting Demi Moore and Patrick Swayze in a sequel to Ghost
(which BTW is a far better movie than this)?  I mean, come on.
Disembowellments?  Eyes being ripped out of sockets?  Horrible
hallucinations?  Bah.  The scene in _Demolition Man_ when Stallone is told
that since the "Franchise Wars of '97" Taco Bell is the only restaurant
there is was scarier than this!

	Feh.  The only positive spin on Event Horizon is that it's probably
going to make the horrendous debacle that will be Starship Troopers look
good.  Glenn told me that everyone he new who'd seen it wished they'd
sucked their eyeballs out with a toilet plunger instead.  I should have
listened to him.  In fact, I'd be in the bathroom right now pumping away
like mad but I still havent unpacked our plunger since we moved.

	I'd suggest that everybody run out, buy some gasoline, and burn
down all the theatres where Event Horizon is showing, but incitement to
arson is probably illegal.  Don't waste money on seeing it.  Rent it on a
two-for-one special ten years from now when you can get it cheap.  I'm
going to bed now; I hope I won't have nightmares thanks to this film.
There'd be nothing worse than drifting off to sleep and dreaming that I was
back in that theatre, watching it again.

	Thank you and good night.



Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 23:22:12 -0500
From: vanya <vanya@partyline.net>
Subject: RE: Starship gravity control

On Sunday, 24 August, 1997 13:24, Simon Early 
[SMTP:sre@taz.compulink.co.uk] wrote:
>
> > I hope you make it a little harder to fiddle with than that!  If I just
> > let
> > it be a dial by the door, then somebody would reach in and give it
> > quick
> > twist one way then the other.  Ha! Ha! Good joke, huh? ;->
>
> In all but the lowest TL ships the "environment controls" are voice
> activated.
> You need to teach the computer your voice (either by speaking, or with a
> standard set of data stored on your ID card) when you move into a cabin.

Then, after all that, there is a safety override that controls the rate of 
change of the gravity field to about 1g/5 minutes.  This allows you time 
for transition between gravitic strengths, and also stops people from 
pulling the above prank on you when you are enjoying a peaceful float about 
the cabin.

- -Vanya

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 21:03:18 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Boredom and homicidal insanity in Traveller

In mail Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca> writes:

>         Cause you also forgot another Trav mental health failing; the
> alcoholism (spaceport bars have far too important a role in the game, IMHO)
> :).

The bar doesn't *have* to serve alcohol. On "yuppie" planets it could
be juice bars. On worlds with tainted or thin atmospheres it could be
oxygen bars (these really exist!).

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 22:22:43 -0700
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

Tue, 26 Aug 1997 19:33:52 +0000, Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com>
>David P. Summers wrote:
>> All, you can say is that there is vocal faction.  Your
>> posts alone do a lot to keep the debate going.  The fact
>> that it keeps getting raised doesn't prove it's right or
>> popular anymore than similar controversies proved that
>> most people knew that Vincent Foster was murdered.

>Why do you have to go and be a butt?

And why do you have to hit personal attacks?  The fact is that
you present the idea that skills count as much stats as a problem
that the majority agree with you that it is a problem.  Both of
these are highly debatable.  (and in fact have been highly debated :-)

> You asked a simple question.  I
>gave you a simple, polite answer, and you decide that it is time to cut
>somebody down for answering you question.

I didn't ask the question.  I did get tired of you simply asserting
your point of view as if your view is the only one that has any
support.  I responded to a post that presents a view I disagree with,
something you yourself have never been shy about.

____________________________
Summers@Alum.MIT.edu

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 06:53:31 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

On Wed, 27 Aug 1997 00:42:06 -0400, Harold Hale wrote:

>    Far be it from me to introduce yet more controversy (as you well know
> that's not my style  ;-)  ), but on the subject of task resolution in
> MMT, wouldn't make more sense to eliminate the so-called "half-dice
> controversy" by simply replacing the 1/2 D6 with a D4?  I don't recall
> this ever being suggested.  It would certainly make the probability
> tables more smooth, people wouldn't have to worry about extra math, and
> D4s are pretty much available everywhere MMT is.

Verrry in-ter-es-tink!  I will certainly consider this an option if
the d3 stays and my players object to it!

James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 07:06:27 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: Winded

On Tue, 26 Aug 97 21:46:11 -0500, Eris Reddoch wrote:

> On 08/26/97 at 03:05 PM,  Mark Urbin <eclipse@ultranet.com> said:
> 
> >   A little simple physics here.  For a shotgun blast to throw the human
> >massed target back, the human massed firer would also get thrown back.  
> 
> Well, I guess you are right for the most part, but...tell you what?  Take a
> 12 gauge shotgun place the butt firmly against your chest and pull the
> trigger. The kick *might* not knock you down, but it won't be a fun
> experience, and it will certainly rock you back.

Most firearms use a system to dampen recoil, like a recoil spring or a
gas action.  Conversely, the energy perceived by the shooter is never
as great as that felt by the target.  The recoil action spreads the
energy out over time, while the target is hit with the full force of
the round's kinetic energy all at once.

> I know from experience that if you aren't braced correctly the kick from a
> 12 gauge does throw your shoulder back hard! It hurts too. ;-)  I can't
> imagine the shot end is less of a kick. OTOH, it wouldn't jerk somebody
> back across a room, like in the movies...I don't think.  The only person
> I've seen shot with a shotgun got it through the foot (right between the
> big and first toe), so blow-back didn't into play...not that I much noticed
> at the time.

I'm surprised nobody's mentioned the 0.5c man-portable railguns from
Eraser.  Ahnold apparently ways as much as a small neutron star :)

This is one of those special abilities I tried to get my ref to use
during an evening playing a freewheeling high fantasy RPG (home
brewed, of course)... "Hollywood Amp".  In essence, a small stick of
dynamite could level a building :)

James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 14:46:56
From: Ian or Katts <ianw@zed.com.au>
Subject: Skill Maintainence

OK, having just made my O3 promotion roll in my Bureaucrat career (Liason
skill ...
gotta love it) I now take a short break from packing for relocation in ummm
three
days (aaarrrrgghhhh panic panic panic).

My idea for T4.1, that may solve the perhaps-mythical problem of overskilled
characters, is that to maintain a skill at level n, you have to spend n hours
per week actually doing it. If you fail to do this, then at the end of the
year you lose a skill level.

Therefore, if you have Admin-6 and spend 12 months alone in a type S scout
ship,
you arent going to be as good working within a bureaucracy. If you used to be
an Expert Marksman and join a pacifist sect for 5 years, you are probably
going
to lose much of your Rifle skill.

What do people think ? I think the idea is sound, but the mechanic needs some
work I think.

Ian Whitchurch

PS Can someone from IG please pay the nice Mr Prior, package up his CSC
gear design,
get an artist to draw some pictures of the designs and publish them as a
booklet.  

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 14:23:11 +0100
From: Simon Early <sre@taz.compulink.co.uk>
Subject: Fusion+, fuel and stuff

I've finally had enough time to read the design sequences in CSC and 
Starships.  I've checked the IG errata and done a search of the last 
11,000 TML messages, and failed to find a relevant discussion, so I 
have some questions.  FFS 2 has not arrived in the UK yet (curses).

Please note that as an opinionated "gearhead" I have no problem 
adjusting the design sequences to fit my perceptions.

Cost of l-Hyd (CSC p 59)
=============
1,000 Cr per T ... I assume the higher price reflects "small" volume 
purchases compared to starship economics?  (I can handle that).


Fusion fuel (CSC p60, Starships p104 to 106)
============
It seems unreasonable that normal fusion uses dueterium in CSC and 
L-hyd in Starships.

Take a TL-15 example
(CSC) 1000 MW / 6.3 = 158.7 m3.  Fuel = .003 x 158.7 = 0.476 m3/100h
for a year's worth of fuel (9000 hours) = 42.85 m3 at a cost of 6.4 MCr

(Starships) 1000 MW = 166.7 m3.  Fuel = 100 m3/year = 3,600 Cr

The power plants (at 0.2 Mcr/m3) are essentially the same price of 33 
MCr, but the annual fuel costs are completely out of line.

Does FFS 2 fix this?


Fusion+ fuel (CSC p60)
============
I can believe either enriched water or dueterium (as someone 
on the TML mentioned that FFS 2 uses dueterium for fusion+), but the 
prices (especially for deuterium) seem high to me.  If dueterium is an 
important fuel-commodity, I find it difficult to believe that its price 
would be more than $100 per m3 (around Cr 50 per m3) when separated 
from water.

At the low levels of production for Earth in 1997, I expect heavy water 
to be a lot more expensive than $100/te, but only because we do not 
have a large-scale use for it.  Does anyone know how much heavy water 
costs for R&D labs and the like?  (As a rough guide for other 
chemicals, if the "10000-tonne lot" cost of the chemical is around $100 
/ m3, you will pay $600 for a 200 litre (45 gallon) drum, and $100 for 
5 litre flask of it ... the distribution and storage costs for small 
quantaties completely swamp the cost of production).

What does FFS 2 give as a cost for deuterium?


Simon

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 06:41:59 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: Re: FF&S2

On Tue, 26 Aug 1997, Tim Connors wrote:

> Questions concerning FF&S2:
> 
>         3. Do Bridge/Normal Workstations require seats?

No, both include space for seats. You can specify one as a stand-up
workstation, I suppose, like Engineering ones on 'Star Trek', but they
throw the chair in in a standard design.
 
>         4. Do Open/Cramped Crewstations require seats?

Same as above, just smaller seats ;-) Seriously <blank>Stations of any
type are complete unit consisting of the seat and any control panels, etc 
that make up the workstation. The bridge of the Millenium Falcon has two
bridge workstations and two seats. The only time you ever need to specify
seats in a design is to give passengers someplace to sit, and that's _all_
they can do in those seats.

>         5. Are G-tanks required for workstations in order to allow
> additional            acceleration without negative task modifiers? Are
> seats still required (if            they ever were)?

Yes, but...what you want are Crew G-tanks) which (at least in my draft
copy of FFS says: "Crew G-tanks include open workstations". Again no
additional seats are necessary.


Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs


> 

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1751
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, August 27 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1752



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Task Resolution
RE: TNE Petition
Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations
World Building
Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations
Re: Air Slug!!
Re: Famille Spofulam review: Event Horizon.
Re: Winded
Re: RoM/Terra TL (15)
Re: Fusion+, fuel and stuff
Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations
RE: Blowthrough
re: TNE Book for T4 
Re: Updated CSC
RE: Binders and other Trivia
Re: RoM/Terra TL (TL15)
Re: Task Resolution
re: winded

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 09:54:14 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

I believe that the task system is a robust mechanism that will handle all
sorts of tasks and situations. I believe that failings that T4 Tasks had
included

a lack of definition of formats,
a rigidity that made tasks difficult to use, and
a lack of use of tasks throughouyt the rest of the text.

My object is to fix that.

Moreover, while writing tasks to reflect each of the skills, it became clear
that there are many  many different situations which call for tasks and that
all need to be addressed. There are times when a task should be based on
skill alone, characteristic alone, characteristic plus an optional skill, and
others.

I believe that the current task chapter enables game masters to create tasks
fo themselves and use them in ways that they feel comfortable with. The
chapter opens up the potential for "styles" of adventures in which (all
within the rules) the author includes tasks that reflect his own
interpretation of how they should be administered.

Those interested in the task debate should email me and request the file. It
is an ascii file.


Marc Miller
FarFuture@aol.com

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 09:49:34 -0400
From: Mark Urbin <eclipse@ultranet.com>
Subject: RE: TNE Petition

Hmmm...since the Milleau books are supposed to be released in chronological
order, and the Milleau 0 book is the only one out yet, it's not surprising
in the least that there has been no talk of a Milleau:Virus book.

There are several major avenues to be explored in the Virus (TNE) era.  A
rush job is not what is needed here.  Some of the avenues include:

- - RC meets Regency
- - RC vs Solmani expansion movement (of course there is one, there *always
is one)
- - RC meets the the expanding Aslan sphere
- - The Empress Wave
- - Vargr expansions
- - The Black Sphere around Capitol

You wanna cover this in 65 pages?  


- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
eclipse@ultranet.com All Opinions are Mine. http://www.ultranet.com/~eclipse/ 
            Amicule, deliciae, num is sum qui mentiar tibi? 
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
- --

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 10:27:04 -0400 (EDT)
From: SemoFetus@aol.com
Subject: Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations

>However, I seem to recall hearing someone on-list claim that FF&S2 had
>moved the "boundary" for thruster plates out to 2000 AU or so, rather than
>the 60-70 we'd originally postulated, and again making Oort clouds a valid
>refuelling point.  If it's true (can anyone confirm?), I may have to re-do
>some of the math for my own self-satisfaction, and jump breakout within
>useful maneuvering range might indeed be possible.


Well, I started work on the HEPlaR tugs last night, so I've decided how it
works in my universe.  However, FF&S2 HEPlaR has horrible fuel efficiency
compared to the old FF&S...  Its tough.

Semo

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 15:26:42 GMT0
From: terry.williams@luton.ac.uk
Subject: World Building

Hi,
	I'm probably setting up a World Builders Workshop list and I'm trying
to gauge the usefulness of such a list - the idea is to have a place where
different biologies, geologies etc can be looked at independant of individual
game mechanics (The original request came from a guy on the Babylon Project
list) but it can be used as a resource to all of the different systems.

If you're interested mail me at Terry.williams@luton.ac.uk and once I get
enough of a response I'll set the LISTSERV up.

Terry

E-mail: Terry.Williams@luton.ac.uk

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 10:36:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: SemoFetus@aol.com
Subject: Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations

>It's *possible* for the icy body to be as big as a planet. Not
>*likely*, but possible. That ought to let the thruster plates work for
>a ways out.

>But the tugs will work too. :-)

>In fact, the published jump co-ordinates might have you pop up quite a
>ways from the port, with just a radio beacon. The port sends out the
>tug to bring you in. That way, if there's a war, only folks with the
>right ID codes will get to use the station. You just turn off the
>beacon, and they can't get to you.... (It's a bit more complex than
>that, but I'm sure that you can figure it out).

That's a damn good idea.  I like it alot.

I'm not thinking that the icy body is as big as a planet, I'm thinking of
alot of smaller iceteroids brought in by independent Belters and such.

Thanks for the idea though,

Chris

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 07:13:23 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Air Slug!!

At 09:23 PM 8/26/97 -0500, you wrote:
>On 08/26/97 at 05:47 AM,  "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net> said:
>
>>My bad.  I think the TACS file choked the server.
>
>Strange, I got the entire TACS from the mailing list on the first try,
>Introduction, Task List, whole thing.
>
>What makes you think it choked?

I send out a huge file, and immediately the list stops sending me mail.
The medication I'm on (prednisone) tends to make one a bit jumpy, so I
immediately assumed the worst.

Yes, I designed this thing while on massive amounts of steroids.  Does it show?
- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: 27 Aug 97 11:03:49 EDT
From: Jeffery.M.Miller@Dartmouth.EDU (Jeffery M. Miller)
Subject: Re: Famille Spofulam review: Event Horizon.

did I just get saved 6.5 bucks? Tell us how you really feel, man! ;->

tch. I really HAD been looking forward to a big-screen eye candy fest. alas.

- -j

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 10:09:28 -0500
From: yikes@evansville.net (Joseph R. Dietrich)
Subject: Re: Winded

>On Tue, 26 Aug 97 21:46:11 -0500, Eris Reddoch wrote:

>> >   A little simple physics here.  For a shotgun blast to throw the human
>> >massed target back, the human massed firer would also get thrown back.
>>
>> Well, I guess you are right for the most part, but...tell you what?  Take a
>> 12 gauge shotgun place the butt firmly against your chest and pull the
>> trigger. The kick *might* not knock you down, but it won't be a fun
>> experience, and it will certainly rock you back.
>
>Most firearms use a system to dampen recoil, like a recoil spring or a
>gas action.  Conversely, the energy perceived by the shooter is never
>as great as that felt by the target.  The recoil action spreads the
>energy out over time, while the target is hit with the full force of
>the round's kinetic energy all at once.

There is a video called "Deadly Weapons" which deals with this issue. In
it, the owner of a body armor company lets himself get shot with a
"assault-style" weapon (an SKS, I think) at a range of about 1 meter. He
stuffed a phone book beneath the vest to provide some protection from
brusing, but nothing else. The shot made him flinch, but didn't knock him
over, or even come close to it.

Slugs do not have a lot of kinetic energy. What they have is a lot of momentum.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 17:10:30 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: RoM/Terra TL (15)

Leroy William Lu Guatney writes:
>hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale) writes:
>>   While I:E provides us some clues to the TL of Terra c. 1000, it is
>>not even remotely a valid source of information for TL info on the RoM. 
>>Far too much time had passed between the two eras.
> 
> 
>Harold, you have to take the _big_ picture into view when deciphering
>canon properly.

That sentence dosen't refute Harold's assertation at all.

(And the big picture indicates that far too much time has passed between the
RoM and the Solomani Rim War for I:E to be much of a source of information
for TL info on the RoM.) 

>Also, I would not have spent so much time on this if it
>weren't important.  Another also, is this really ties into the _very_
>fabric of T4 and Milieu 0, which no canonist has taken into consideration.

Can we get one thing straight? the contention on the part of those of us you 
dub 'canonists' is that some of the material published under T4 is 
inconsistent with material published under CT, MT, and TNE. That the 
aforementioned T4 material agrees with itself is self-evident. It is in no
way proof that it is not inconsistent with previously published material. 
That is, after all, just what we're arguing about. 

>We have absolutely proved that Terra was TL14 (CT)

We have a canonical statement to that effect, yes.

>and a _very_ reasonable assertion for the possibility of TL15 at the outset 
>of the Rim War.  

We also have an extremely compelling evidence that this is _not_ the case. I
refer to the fact that none of Terra's defense forces was TL 15. The point
that Imperial fighting units might be of lesser TL than the maximum because
of logistics concerns does not apply when it comes to the defensive forces
of a planet. With respect to defensive forces logistics are either very
simple (they make it locally) in which case Terra is TL 14 (at that time) or
more complex (they import it from somewhere more sophisticated) in which
case Terra could actually be even less than TL 14. But under no circumstances
would a planet's defense forces be less than it's TL. (Except in borderline
cases).

>Given the MT +1 DM to CT sources, 

No, given that this rule means what you think it means (something I'm not
prepared to admit until I've checked it out for myself; what is the page
reference?) then we have two conflicting pieces of evidence, one specific
(Terra is TL 14) and one general (Solomani planets are one TL higher than
CT sources indicate). In such a case I submit that the specific evidence
have more weight than the general evidence. But even if you disagree (and
I fully expect you to disagree, at least in this specific case) then you
don't automatically disprove one piece of evidence by introducing a contrary 
piece of evidence; at most you cast them both into doubt.

>Of course, both sides of this whole discussion have been riddled with
>assumptions.  

Actually, Harold, I, et alii have tried very hard to distinguish between
evidence and assumptions. If we've failed at any time, point it out and
we'll review our ideas.

>The material is vague, and as my earlier post pointed out,
>we have room for any RoM TL, 12-16.  

And as we keep pointing out to you, 90% of the evidence (T4 excluded) points 
to RoM being solid TL 12 with a few TL 13 exceptions. The remaining 10% can
mostly be explained away.

>If T4 says it was "known maximum" of 15, that is _perfectly_ good enough for 
>me.  Afterall, canon _really_ is what we want it to be--nothing else.

Well, if the T4 authors deliberately decided to change things retroactively,
that's one thing. They are certainly legally entitled to it. But it has
absolutely nothing to do with the assertation that this is not consistent
with previously published material.

 
>If someone wants to point out that the TI was TL14 in 700, just before the
>formation of the Solomani Autonomous Region, then we have a major threat to
>the canonist movement, and we can't have that, now can we. :)  

If someone wants to point that out and have the references to back it up
that's perfectly OK to me. Actually, I don't see why it shouldn't be. We
have a canonical statement to the effect that the Imperium reached TL 14
in 700. This may or may not include some of the Imperial planets in the
Solomani Rim. Terra was a very important Imperial planet at the time and
could well have been one of the planets that did reach TL 14 at that time.
But there is no direct evidence (AFAIK) that such was the case. 

>Oh yes, I am sure some rationalization can be had that explains all of that, 
>but isn't that what I've been trying to do?  <Rhetorical>  Besides, nobody 
>can claim that I didn't examine all the "facts," now can they.

No, but I, at least, is tempted to claim that you're ignoring a large number 
of them.

>Acceptance of this kind of information trying evaluate/analyze the game
>eventually comes down to a few plausible views.  There is no reason that
>one is better than any other in the end.  

Yes there is. If one view is backed by 90% of the evidence and the opposing
view is backed by 10% of the evidence, then the first view is better than
the second view.

>We have all had good ideas for
>an intentional/unintentional departure from the "canon", and I contend that
>it is the quality of the writing, and reasonableness of the arguments, that
>when we get a new Traveller book, we are persuaded to accept it into a
>constantly modified and updated view of our own "canons" (sp?).

Yes, but as I grow weary of pointing out, the question isn't about the
quality of any private campaign. The question is about the quality of the
official Traveller Universe. The one anyone publishing something under
the Traveller name and not clearly marked as a variant ought, IMO, to
stick to. To me, one very important part of the quality of a game
background is consistency. It's not the only part, and I concede that on
occasion the good caused by a change in the background outweighs the harm
done by the inconsistency introduced thereby, but I feel that an incon-
sistency does harm in and of itself to the enjoyment of the game. So any
change should be a marked improvement; changing things just because the
new thing is a good idea is not enough. It has to be a very good idea.
 

      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 16:31:57 +0100
From: "Nick Munn" <N.S.Munn@sheffield.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Fusion+, fuel and stuff

Simon Early <sre@taz.compulink.co.uk>


> Fusion+ fuel (CSC p60)
> ============

> At the low levels of production for Earth in 1997, I expect heavy water 
> to be a lot more expensive than $100/te, but only because we do not 
> have a large-scale use for it.  Does anyone know how much heavy water 
> costs for R&D labs and the like?

Isotopically pure (99.996% minimum) is UK pounds 127.60 / 50 g
99.9% atom % is UK L70.10 / 100g

density = 1.11 g/ml so 90 ml is roughly 100g

The 99.9% stuff is therefore a bit short of L1/ml and 1 m^3 of it 
would therefore cost slightly under a million pounds -- call it
US $1.5 million.  The really pure stuff is three times as expensive.

>  (As a rough guide for other 
> chemicals, if the "10000-tonne lot" cost of the chemical is around $100 
> / m3, you will pay $600 for a 200 litre (45 gallon) drum, and $100 for 
> 5 litre flask of it ... the distribution and storage costs for small 
> quantaties completely swamp the cost of production).

Well, if bulk cost = 5 litre cost (say) then we're talking L3500/m^3
or about Cr 10 000/m^3, depending on how you value the credit wrt RL.

Data from Sigma chemicals catalogue, 1995.


Nick

Dr. Nick Munn, Dept. of Information Studies, University of Sheffield
Tel. (0)114 222 2673, email n.s.munn@sheffield.ac.uk

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 11:43:47 -0400 (EDT)
From: SemoFetus@aol.com
Subject: Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations

Quoth Pete Newman:

>If this planet has nonfluid oceans anyone with a streamlined ship can
>simply land in the oceans, pump water into the ship, refine it in the
>fuel processors and go.  If the world is low tech and does not have
>water it should probably not have a population (unless it is a native
>minor race).  I would also like to point out that the formal definiton
>of 0 hydrographics in the UPP is a world with less than 4% of its
>surface covered with water.  Four percent of the surface of a planet is
>quite a big area.  For example the Mediterranean Sea, on Earth, occupies

Well, as it turns out, the planet has been interdicted because the minor
human race on the surface of the world has the tendency to kill the scouts
and trade parties that land on the surface of the world.  They are TL4 or 5
(my notes are upstairs).  It does have fluid oceans, however, and as it turns
out, it DOES have a gas giant (I forgot to mark that on the subsector map).

So now that it is interdicted and safely out of the way, I can get on with
building the deep-space station I had planned and the tugs to go with it. :)

>It will make a more interesting story if he leaves it as it is.  The
>players might not even remember stoping at the gas giant of a lowtech
>nonwater world - but they will remember stopping at this deep space
>outpost.  The costs of doing business in the middle of nowhere will be a
>great reason for trippling the prices of everything sold at this station
>- which is a good way to bleed extra cash out of the players pockets.

And in addition, it makes a great freezone/neutral meeting ground for
organized crime and such, as it is under the jurisdiction of no one but the
Imperium in the broad sense (no one trade org. controls the station, no gov't
really has a stake in it).  It will not be a pirate haven, however, due to
the strict anti-pirate stance of the local trade unions and corporations.

And yes, everything will cost lots of money :)

> Even if it has no water ships can mine for ice in the asteroid belt or
>find comets & refine them.  However these tasks are more of a hassle
>than simply going to a deep space station.

Especially since, when you really think about it, not that many ship designs
would have fuel purification.  Who designs your average trader and says:
"Let's give up valuable cargo space and replace it with fuel purification
machinery to up prices even more as it will take about 6-24 hours for my crew
to refuel when they could do it in under an hour at the local starport!"

Semo

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 08:17:35 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: RE: Blowthrough

At 06:35 AM 8/26/97 -0500, you wrote:
>Howdy.
>
>> Mass        Maximum Damage
>> 1-25kg         1D6
>> 26-50kg        2D6
>> 51-100kg       3D6
>> 101-200kg      4D6
>>
>> So it will, statistically speaking, require 4 blows from a battle axe to
>> kill a rabbit?
>
>Why do you apply blowthrough (where'd that name come from? ;-) to 
>non-hydrostatic, low velocity weapons?  It doesn't apply to battleaxi.

This will be made explicit in the next version of TACS.

>> Please, lose the blowthrough rule. It is a nice idea but just does not seem
>> to work on the scale of the T4 combat system because, simply put, it IS
>> harder to kill a bear with a shotgun than it would be to kill a rabbit
>
>Ummm.  Not really.  Shotguns are another exception to der Rule.  But assume 
>it's a .30-06: role all 5D, and take the highest 3; should be a lot easier
to 
>kill Mr. Kodiak.

A Kodiak bear would easily take all 5D6, due to its mass.

- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 17:20:09 +0100 (BST)
From: Eamon Patrick Watters <E.Watters@Queens-Belfast.AC.UK>
Subject: re: TNE Book for T4 

"Dave 'Washu' Moodie" <dmoodie@st.nepean.uws.edu.au> sent:

>Subject: re: TNE Book for T4

>> So, If you would like to see such a book, please
>> e-mail me a message, with the subject line 'TNE
>> Petition', and the body 'I would buy a TNE wrap-up
>> book'. The address to send this to is
>> 'tnepetition@hotmail.com'.

>I'd looove to see a follow up book, but it would be nonsensical for IG to
>produce 1 book that is completely unrelated to their current product line
>at the current time. I think we just need to grit our teeth and bear the
>long wait for new TNE backround stuff. A huge Milieu 1201 book - like 164
>pages in tiny print (something I loved about TNE, you always got a
>lot of words for your money) would suit me fine. No new rules are really
>necessary and would be mostly useless to TNE users anyway.
>'M.'Dmoodie                   

I don't think it would be beyond the bounds of reason for IG to produce a 
non Milleau 0 book now, wasn't that the reason Milleaus were chosen as 
the T4 backgrounds, flexibility?

I myself am pessimistic about EVER seeing a 'Milleau 1200' book by IG - 
but I would pay good money for a TNE wrap-up book. Even if you feel that 
IG arn't going to authorise/produce a TNE wrap-up book, if you want one, 
send me a message saying so - and we can try to get one through the pipeline.

ATB,

Eamon Watters

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 12:54:12 -0400
From: Craig Hyett <hyettc@MAGELLAN.UMontreal.CA>
Subject: Re: Updated CSC

I just had to interject my observation here:

>>
>>Oh yes, and I've added a few weapons from EA as well.  Question: were these
>>designed using the FFS2 system, or Greg Porter's own method?  If the latter,
>>can they be converted back into real-world units?
>
>
>	They were probably done using Greg's system, since FF&S2 only got
>written after EA was released.  Apparently 3G3 (Greg's system) was superior
>to FF&S1 in many respects, and from what I can tell, so is FF&S2, so
>quality/consistency ought not tobe that big of a problem.

I have tried to build some weapons using FF&S2 and I found that the ranges
for energy weapons (PCMP's et. al.) do not come out anywhere near those
listed in EA.

It could be that I am missing something, since the range calculation in
FF&S2 doesn't seem to have a description, but even for the larger plasma
cannons the ranges I calculated were much shorter (on the order of Long
instead of the *subregional* ranges listed in EA).

I don't have my calculations (or my books) here at work but I can post them
later if anyone is interested.  I used the barrel energy (I think thats the
correct term) in Mj for the calculation if that helps.

I appologize if someone has already mentioned this, I am behind at least 12
digests...

Wow my first post...
cool.

Craig Hyett <hyettc@magellan.umontreal.ca>


Understanding is a three edged sword....
             -Ambassador Kosh, Babylon 5

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 97 18:10 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: RE: Binders and other Trivia

In-Reply-To: <01BCB149.723D9A20@ip56.pontiac.mi.pub-ip.psi.net>

Allen,

> I love the 3-ring binder approach.  I currently take my materials
> and photocopy them, and put them into a binder.  I can mark up,
> move, insert, change, etc., whatever I want, and I avoid the
> dog-eared, torn rulebook problem.

A binder would be nice. As long as it's 2-ring (or maybe 4-ring) and A4 
sized.
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 97 18:10 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: RoM/Terra TL (TL15)

In-Reply-To: <9708250509.AA11388@carbon.cudenver.edu>

> Harold, you have to take the _big_ picture into view when deciphering
> canon properly.  Also, I would not have spent so much time on this if it
> weren't important.  Another also, is this really ties into the _very_ 
> fabric of T4 and Milieu 0, which no canonist has taken into consideration.

It's *because* the TL of the ROM is so important to M0 that we're making such a 
big deal about this.

> We have absolutely proved that Terra was TL14 (CT) and a _very_ reasonable

There was never any argument about this.

> assertion for the possibility of TL15 at the outset of the Rim War.  Given

Er, no, you've *said* it is, with no evidence to back you up.

> the MT +1 DM to CT sources, 

Huh?

> Terra was TL15 (MT) at the outset of the Rim
> War.

No it wasn't. It was TL14. See above.

> Since the Imperium only reached TL15 in 1000, and the Solomani had gone
> it alone since 871, then the TI did not make Terra TL15 with the Imperium's
> help, and this is consistent with other knowledge.  Given that this view is

Er, no, Terra reached TL15 after the Imperial invasion.

> consistent with the Martian Terraforming project of 395, the Terrans have
> been Common TL15 all through the pre-TI contact period of the planet's history.

Absolute rubbish.

> Of course, both sides of this whole discussion have been riddled with
> assumptions.  The material is vague, and as my earlier post pointed out,
> we have room for any RoM TL, 12-16.  If T4 says it was "known maximum" of
> 15, that is _perfectly_ good enough for me.  

If T4 said it was TL42 would you still be happy?
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 09:54:42 -0700
From: Scott Ellsworth <Scott_Ellsworth@alumni.hmc.edu>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

I would love to see the new chapter.  The task system is something that
brought a lot of coherency to Traveller, and eliminated a lot of numbers
from the text.  Number elimination is a good thing, as it simplifies the
game and the play, as long as it does not simplify out something you need.

For example, my players have a list of tasks on a single page of paper -
one line per.  It includes a few dozen starship tasks, survey tasks, and so
on.  This way, during play, it is pretty easy to see that warm starting a
fusion plant is easy, requires engineering, can be done unskilled, and
takes a while.

At 09:54 AM 8/27/97 -0400, Marc wrote:
>I believe that the task system is a robust mechanism that will handle all
>sorts of tasks and situations.

Agreed fully.  The more usage, the better.

> I believe that failings that T4 Tasks had
>included
>a lack of definition of formats,
>a rigidity that made tasks difficult to use, and
>a lack of use of tasks throughouyt the rest of the text.

Yes yes yes!  More use of tasks in the rest of the book would lead to
dozens if nor hundreds of examples, so that the DM can spend their time on
the creative part, and so when they need a simple task, they can make up a
consistent one.

One reason I like the whole task idea is that it downplays mechanics.  I
started a game recently in which the characters used an Amber-like dice
less system.  Four stats, no skills at all.

By using tasks, it was still quite easy for me to know what people were
capable of doing, and how well.  That they used no T4 mechanics did not
matter at all.

Further, I will never use straight stat+skill with the current generation
system, as skills are drawn from a very different distribution.  I do not
have to, though.  With good tasks listed, I need only come up with a
relation between task difficulty and chance of success, and I am rolling
with no further work!  The system is still coherent, despite my having
changed a fundamental part of it.

One addition - the T4 system lacked real world rules of thumb.  You know
the probabilities, and you know how you wanted it to go.  Most people
looking at the various options do not want a detailed table of how
difficult things are, they want quick rules.  How about:

- ---

The current T4 system combines stats drawn from a bell curve with skills
accrued during generation via a Poisson process.  Game master who want a
different task resolution system are invited to use their own, as long as
they remember the following relations:

A competent professional with reasonable stats should be able to complete a
routine task successfully 90% of the time.

A novice with similar stats should be able to complete an easy task
successfully 90% of the time.

An extremely skilled master with reasonable stats should be able to attempt
the impossible, and occasionally succeed.

The pinnacle of human skills and stats should only succeed on an inhuman
task if he or she has some assistance.

All tasks within the rules are written with this in mind - For example, any
task listed as "routine" should be viewed as something a competent
professional has done many times, and can usually do without thinking.

- ---

The above, BTW, seemed to be a logical extension of the task difficulty
level definitions.  the only change is putting a few more specifics in,
like the actual desired percentages.  I am not wedded to them and you
should feel free to change them if that fits your model better.

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: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 13:33:28 -0400
From: Mark Urbin <eclipse@ultranet.com>
Subject: re: winded

>Date: Tue, 26 Aug 97 21:46:11 -0500
eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch) writes
>On 08/26/97 at 03:05 PM,  Mark Urbin <eclipse@ultranet.com> said:
>>   A little simple physics here.  For a shotgun blast to throw the human
>>massed target back, the human massed firer would also get thrown back.  
>Well, I guess you are right for the most part, but...tell you what?  Take a
>12 gauge shotgun place the butt firmly against your chest and pull the
>trigger. The kick *might* not knock you down, but it won't be a fun
>experience, and it will certainly rock you back.

   No thanks.  The kick would not knock me down.  One of the advantages of
massing over a hundred kilos.  It will rock me, possible crack a rib.  It
will hurt like a bastard.  Hmmm...sounds like people describing begin hit
by a shotgun blast while wearing a decent kevlar vest.
   I guess the physics do work out. :-)

>I know from experience that if you aren't braced correctly the kick from a
>12 gauge does throw your shoulder back hard! It hurts too. ;-)  I can't
>imagine the shot end is less of a kick. 

   It looks like we are in agreement here.  The shot end is just about the
same  amount of 'kick'.  Rember that it's also concentrated on a smaller
surface area than the butt of the shotgun.

>OTOH, it wouldn't jerk somebody back across a room, like in the movies...
>I don't think. 

   Ok, so we are in agreement.  It's not the 'kick' of the blast that
causes someone hit by a shotgun to fly/thrash.  Hydroshock (I think that's
the correct term) to the person's system causes random muscle contractions.
 That could cause 'em to flop before dropping.

   This topic was beat to near-death in the CIS RPG forum years ago while
debating Shadowrun (1st edition) rules.


- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
eclipse@ultranet.com http://www.ultranet.com/~eclipse/ #insert <disclaimer.h>
      Smith&Wesson -- The Ultimate "Point & Click" User interface.
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
- -

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1752
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, August 27 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1753



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: FF&S2
Re: Winded
Re: Winded
Viking Infanticide, paitence
Re: TNE Petition
Re: Skill Maintainence
Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations
hehehehehee....
Re: Winded
Re: TNE milieu
Re: Fusion+, fuel and stuff
Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)
Re: T4.1 Skills, Craftsman

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 13:48:05 -0400
From: "Chris Cox" <chriscox@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: FF&S2

Semo (the Confuseded) wrote:
> 1.)  Table 212: Food Storage.  Does the volume include the amount of
> food, or is it in addition to the amount of food?

I think Craig Berry's answer was right on the money, the volume listed
includes the stored food.  However this is not very apparent.

> 2.)  What is the volume of an individual workstation or crewstation?
> That is:  Is it the volume & mass of a seat + the mass of the workstation
> from the table in the book, or what?

As both Doug and Craig said, neither workstations or crewstation require
seats.  Seats are included in the figures for workstations and crewstations. 
I think that there will need to be a clarification added to Errata list about
this.

> 3.)  What constitutes an electronic system when figuring out how many
> electronics crew members are needed?

On Page 75 it says " The electronics crew operates on-board electronic
systems: sensors, communicators, and computers", so I would geuss that the
(number of installed electronic systems) would be the total number of
sensors, communicators, and computers, but wouldn't include controls,
avionics and such.

Tim Connors wrote:

> 1. I cannot find Table 185: Control Systems (referenced on page 72).
>
> 2. The information on the "Wedge" configuration appears to be
> missing/incorrect on Table 160: Hull Shape Modifiers.

These are in the Errata List which can be found at either my web page
(http://users.aol.com/yanbeck/trav.htm) or on Joe Heck's page
(http://www.missouri.edu/~ccjoe/traveller/index.html).  If you have trouble
accessing the Errata List E-mail me and I'll send you a copy.

> 3. Do Bridge/Normal Workstations require seats?
>
> 4. Do Open/Cramped Crewstations require seats?

See the answer to Semo (the Confuseded)'s 2nd question. 

> 5. Are G-tanks required for workstations in order to allow
> additional acceleration without negative task modifiers? Are
> seats still required (if they ever were)?

If you have Artificial Gravity & G Compensation installed G-tanks are not
required.  However if you are asking do G-tanks add their 1G compensation to
the compensation of Artificial Gravity & G Compensation, I don't know. 
Personally, I don't like that Idea, but the prevalent opinion for FF&S was
that they did.  I forward this to the GDW-Beta list I see If there is a
clearer answer.

> 6. Is there really any excuse for "<-->?"

This too is addressed in the Errata List, but still no good excuse for it.

Chris Cox
"It's cold outside, there's no kind of atmosphere,
I'm all alone, more or less,..."
(chriscox@ix.netcom.com)
The Draconis Cluster Traveller pages
(http://users.aol.com/yanbeck/trav.htm)

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 17:44:10 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: Winded

On Wed, 27 Aug 1997 10:09:28 -0500, Joseph R. Dietrich wrote:

> There is a video called "Deadly Weapons" which deals with this issue. In
> it, the owner of a body armor company lets himself get shot with a
> "assault-style" weapon (an SKS, I think) at a range of about 1 meter. He
> stuffed a phone book beneath the vest to provide some protection from
> brusing, but nothing else. The shot made him flinch, but didn't knock him
> over, or even come close to it.

I bet you anything that he was fully braced to receive the blow, just
like the shooter.  Most body armour wouldn't stand up to assault rifle
ammunition (5.56mm NATO) so either the propellent charge for the round
was lower than average or the body armour was the higher threat type.

> Slugs do not have a lot of kinetic energy. What they have is a lot of momentum.

This isn't true.  Momentum is directly related to kinetic energy.  As
momentum is lost, so is kinetic energy.  If a projectile has lots of
momentum, it also has lots of KE.

I'm not sure what (if any) units are used to measure "momentum".
Kinetic Energy, OTOH, is easily calculated using a simple formula:

        2
KE=0.5MV

With it, you can calculate the KE of a bullet or a bowling ball.

James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 11:27:27 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Winded

At 10:09 AM 8/27/97 -0500, you wrote:

>There is a video called "Deadly Weapons" which deals with this issue. In
>it, the owner of a body armor company lets himself get shot with a
>"assault-style" weapon (an SKS, I think) at a range of about 1 meter. He
>stuffed a phone book beneath the vest to provide some protection from
>brusing, but nothing else. The shot made him flinch, but didn't knock him
>over, or even come close to it.
>
>Slugs do not have a lot of kinetic energy. What they have is a lot of
momentum.

In this case, the gunshot victim knows eactly when and where the shot is
coming from, and is braced for it.  In a combat situation, being hit will
be a total surprise, and might catch you completely off balance.
- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 19:33:50 +0100
From: Jo_Grant/DUB/Lotus@lotus.com
Subject: Viking Infanticide, paitence

Sorry folks,
     Turns out I didn't hear about this from a friend, I picked up one of
my friend's books and read a bit of it while waiting for her. The question
is which journal did I read it from? The issue is further complicated by
the fact that I am now in the US and she is in Ireland and the Journal
wasn't called something obvious like "The Jounral of Viking Infanticide" or
some such. Even the article wasn't on Vikings or Infanticide in specific
but rather on something that this happend to be related to. These things
happen when you open a book to a random page and read.
     Anyway, we're looking. I'll post as soon as we've found it. Sorry to
get your interest up and keep you waiting...

Obligatory Traveller Bit:
     During the course of an adventure the PCs are told to go to a certain
gentleman and find out the answer to a certain question that the Patron and
him had discussed previously.
     Upon arriving the gentleman does not know the answer and can't
remember having discussed it with the patron (who is uncontactable during
the course of this scene). The gentleman does keep a lot of books and is
habitually late. It is up to the players to make the intellectual leap that
the information might have been aquired through one of the many books the
gentleman keeps in his waiting area...

     Cheers,
          Jo

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 18:37:44 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: TNE Petition

On Wed, 27 Aug 1997 09:49:34 -0400, Mark Urbin wrote:

> Hmmm...since the Milleau books are supposed to be released in chronological
> order, and the Milleau 0 book is the only one out yet, it's not surprising
> in the least that there has been no talk of a Milleau:Virus book.
> 
> There are several major avenues to be explored in the Virus (TNE) era.  A
> rush job is not what is needed here.  Some of the avenues include:
> 
> - RC meets Regency
> - RC vs Solmani expansion movement (of course there is one, there *always
> is one)
> - RC meets the the expanding Aslan sphere
> - The Empress Wave
> - Vargr expansions
> - The Black Sphere around Capitol
> 
> You wanna cover this in 65 pages?  

Although I never actually played or reffed in the TNE universe (yet) I
believe IG still has a certain responsibility in this task if it
doesn't want to alienate some of their current Traveller customers.

An example of such responsibility came from the company that produced
TORG a few years ago.  The company folded its doors, but not before
releasing a final sourcebook that provided closure for their game
universe that tied up all of the loose ends.  Very professional.

James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 18:37:38 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: Skill Maintainence

On Wed, 27 Aug 1997 14:46:56, Ian or Katts wrote:

> 
> OK, having just made my O3 promotion roll in my Bureaucrat career (Liason
> skill ...
> gotta love it) I now take a short break from packing for relocation in ummm
> three
> days (aaarrrrgghhhh panic panic panic).
> 
> My idea for T4.1, that may solve the perhaps-mythical problem of overskilled
> characters, is that to maintain a skill at level n, you have to spend n hours
> per week actually doing it. If you fail to do this, then at the end of the
> year you lose a skill level.
> 
> Therefore, if you have Admin-6 and spend 12 months alone in a type S scout
> ship,
> you arent going to be as good working within a bureaucracy. If you used to be
> an Expert Marksman and join a pacifist sect for 5 years, you are probably
> going
> to lose much of your Rifle skill.
> 
> What do people think ? I think the idea is sound, but the mechanic needs some
> work I think.

I like it.  Anyone that works in the technical industry knows how fast
technology advances in today's world, and being out of touch for a
year can have you playing catch-up.  But how do we implement it?

One game system used to implement such a rule, but I forget which one
(or how they did it, for that matter).  Something like this would have
to be worked out manually by the referee each year-end to determine
exactly how many "uses" of a particular skill would be required to
keep it from dropping one level.  The tricky part would be keeping
track of how often seldom used skills are actually used over an entire
year.

The only suggestion I could make would be to determine-- as you
stated-- how many hours per week would be necessary to keep all of a
characters skills from diminishing.  Then simply make sure that the
character spends X hours per week performing this duty (access to the
proper training or practice areas would be necessary).  If the
character spends less than X hours during one week, or misses an
entire week all together (eg: the character is on safari or
imprisoned), the referee will have to begin to keep a careful record.
The character should be allowed to try and make up the lost time later
in the future.  If, at the end of the year, the character has shown to
have not spent sufficient time maintaining his skill levels, skill
reduction is in order.

James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 12:24:17 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations

>However, FF&S2 HEPlaR has horrible fuel efficiency
>compared to the old FF&S...  Its tough.

That's an error, unfortunately; the fuel efficiency was intended to stay
exactly the same.

Bruce

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 12:15:54 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: hehehehehee....

my NSLBVFGS is moving to a larger location in about a week, and so they've
been going through the back room and seeling things at great discounts.

Yesterday I grabbed Grav Ball (Fasa, good condition), Universe (SPI, mint),
and the Karameikos boxed set for AD&D, plus two BattleTech novels for about
$20 all told.

Didn't see any Traveller stuff beyond one lone copy of Survival Margin.

They do have a number of old GDW games, including Double Star and Bloodtree
Rebellion, if you are interested in seeing what they might have avalible,
either mail me or call them at (650) 322-GAME.  Gamescape does do mail order.

Tell 'em I sent you.
- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 20:09:46 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: Winded

> Slugs do not have a lot of kinetic energy. What they have is a lot of momentum.

So, do you think this should have an impact on the 3D max rule?

Kenneth.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 13:50:17 -0700
From: Chris Griffen <cgriffen@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: TNE milieu

Mark Urbin wrote:

>Hmmm...since the Milleau books are supposed to be released in chronological
>order, and the Milleau 0 book is the only one out yet, it's not surprising
>in the least that there has been no talk of a Milleau:Virus book.

Ah, but there has. In IG's infancy, there was talk of a "TNE wrap-up book"
that would describe the major subplots of TNE and where they were headed.
The term "wrap-up book" may be a bit of a misnomer since the book would be
more of a beginning than an end, but the basic gist was to be that it would
resolve the mysteries that TNE left hanging.

>There are several major avenues to be explored in the Virus (TNE) era.  A
>rush job is not what is needed here.  Some of the avenues include:
>
>- - RC meets Regency
>- - RC vs Solmani expansion movement (of course there is one, there *always
>is one)
>- - RC meets the the expanding Aslan sphere
>- - The Empress Wave
>- - Vargr expansions
>- - The Black Sphere around Capitol
>
>You wanna cover this in 65 pages?

I agree, but it would require Marc Miller's blessing (and license) for an
independent company to develop a series of books to address the TNE
"milieu." At least one proposal has been made, but to my knowledge, Marc
has not yet answered the proposal.

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: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 14:14:55 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: Re: Fusion+, fuel and stuff

On Wed, 27 Aug 1997, Simon Early wrote:

> 
> At the low levels of production for Earth in 1997, I expect heavy water 
> to be a lot more expensive than $100/te, but only because we do not 
> have a large-scale use for it.  Does anyone know how much heavy water 
> costs for R&D labs and the like?  (As a rough guide for other 
> chemicals, if the "10000-tonne lot" cost of the chemical is around $100 
> / m3, you will pay $600 for a 200 litre (45 gallon) drum, and $100 for 
> 5 litre flask of it ... the distribution and storage costs for small 
> quantaties completely swamp the cost of production).

That's hard to say...the most common use for deuterated water is as a
solvent for proton NMR...it's pretty expensive, but you're buying it by
the 10 ml vial...Last I bought it it was on the order of $80 for a 10 or
25 mL vial (I think! It's been a heck of a long time since I perused an
Aldrich catalog) A quick check of a current catalog showed that about
their cheapest price for 100% atom-D (IE pure D2O) is $609/kg.

Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 21:37:32 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)

On Sun, 24 Aug 1997 16:44:27 -0700, Douglas E. Berry wrote:

> The Tactical Action Combat System, version 2.1

The Tactical Action Combat System Review, version 2.1

> designed by Douglas E. Berry (dberry@hooked.net)

constructive criticism by James W. Lindsay (jlindsay@direct.ca)

:)

> APs and Tasks.
> 
> Action Points may be applied to certain tasks as a positive modifier to the
> task number.  The most common use of this is the Initiative task (to get
> the first shot/action in a confrontation) and the To Hit task (to increase
> chances of hitting)

A few examples in the final draft might be a good idea.
 
> Combatant Turn Sequence.
> 
> 2 Action Phase:  Starting with the combatant with the lowest AP total, all 
                                                        ^^^^^^
>                  combatants perform their desired actions for the turn.

This has been in debate since RPG combat systems came into existence.
Some people believe that the "slowest" or "most disadvantaged"
opponent should go first, allowing others to react to that opponent.
Others believe that it should be the other way around, allowing
"faster" or "more advantaged" opponents the chance to eliminate
potential threats (ie: getting shot at by the enemy) before they get a
chance to act against *them*.  Your choice to use the former method
is, of course, your own.

Might I suggest an alternative that can be used, perhaps, as an
optional rule:

The combatants are allowed to expend _up_to_half_ their APs beginning
with the combatant with the HIGHEST AP total (they do not have to
expend any APs if they so choose).  Once the last combatant has had a
chance to expend APs (up to half of their total), the order of play
reverses.  Combatants now expend their remaining APs, beginning with
the individual with the LOWEST AP total.  This allows combatants with
superior AP totals to act first if they so choose, while still
allowing them to react to APs spent by their slower opponents.

> Long Term Actions

A couple of examples here might flesh out the text a bit more.
 
> Operating a doorway takes AP.  See the Consolidated Action Point list for
> the details.  The door way/hatch opens at the beginning of the next turn.
> (Exception: If the combatant ended the previous turn next to the doorway,
> and her first action is to open the door, referee's discretion on letting
> the door open during the turn.)
> 
> Airlocks take 15 turns to completely cycle if there is a pressure difference.

Might I suggest "turns=2x UWP atmosphere difference" (taken from SOM).
Example, going from ATM=7 to total vacuum would take 2x7 or 14 combat
turns.

> IV.  Basic Combat
> 
> There are three basic questions that need to be addressed in the combat
> segment.  Who goes first?  Do I hit?  How much damage did I do?
> 
> Initiative:
> 
> Whenever two or more combatants come into to conflict, or any situation
> where it is important to determine who moves first, use the following task:

I am a bit confused here.  Is this procedure only necessary if two
combatants have identical AP totals, or simply if two characters wish
to-- as an example-- open the same iris valve during the same combat
turn?  It seems to be in conflict with Section II.

> Melee Combat:
> 
> Melee Combat covers brawling and combat with hand-to-hand weapons.  The
> basic to-hit task in melee is:
> 
> To hit in melee:
> Dex+Brawling or Weapon skill < Average (2D6)
> Requires an AP expenditure (4AP)
> AP may be spent to raise target number
> 
> An attacker in melee may spend extra AP to increase the damage done.  This
> adds one point of damage for every 2 AP spent, and increases the difficulty
> of the to hit task to Difficult (2.5D6)
> 
> The target may attempt to block the attack using the following task:
> 
> To block a melee attack:
> Dex+Brawling or Weapon skill < Difficult (2.5D6)
> Requires an AP expenditure (6AP)
> AP may be spent to raise target number
> Block must be declared before attacker rolls the to hit task.

I'd add the remark that an object is usually necessary to block or
parry a melee attack.  There should also be some mention of risk to
the blocker to whatever appendage s/he uses to deflect the incoming
attack if s/he does not have an object to block with.  I know another
task roll would only complicate things but many RPGs allow characters
to block attacks all day long without any detrimental effects :)

> The target may also dodge:

Assuming the defender was wise enough to retain enough APs to, in
fact, dodge or block the attack :)

> Range and Aiming AP:
> 
> AP may be spent to increase the target number of the to hit task, with a
> few limitations.  AP spent on the to-hit task increase the target number by
> one for every AP spent out to the effective range of the weapon.  Beyond
> that range, every 3AP raises the target number by one.
> 
> Example:  Arod is firing a pistol with a range of Short.  His target is 25
> meters away (Short range).  If he spends AP to increase his to hit chances,
> each AP will increase his target number by one.  Arod switches to a target
> 60 meters down range (Medium range) Arod now has to spend 3AP  for each one
> point improvement in the target number, due to the inherent inaccuracy of
> the pistol.
> 
> To gain any benefit from aiming at Long or greater range, the weapon must
> be braced in some way.  This can be on a rest, bipod, or fired from a
> stable prone or seated position.  If these standards are not met, treat
> firing at Long or greater as being performed at a range beyond the weapons
> printed range.  IF the weapon's printed range is less than Long, it cannot
> benefit from aiming at Long or greater unless braced (no additional AP
> expenditures allowed).

You might want to include the optional EA rule regarding absolute
maximum range of certain weapons (ie: two range bands beyond the Aimed
Fire Range).  It is, after all, a combat-related rule designed to
mimic the limitations of most weaponry and should be included in any
set of potential combat rules.

> Autofire:
> 
> When using suppression fire, total the number of rounds fired into the
> designated area (called the Beaten Zone).  Anyone entering this area during
> that turn has to roll D6 equal to the number of rounds.  Every 6 on the
> dice indicates a hit by a random round.  Remove one die from the die pool
> for every hit, then halve the pool for the remainder of the round.  Repeat
> the process for every target that enters the Beaten Zone.  Because of the
> extreme danger suppressive fire causes anyone attempting to enter the
> Beaten Zone must succeed at the following task:

This will mean rolling an awful lot of dice (an inherent problem when
using autofire weapons and 6-second combat turns)!

Might I suggest the following: if 10 rounds are fired into an area,
roll 10d6-- with each '6' result indicating a hit by a single
projectile. If 11-20 rounds are fired, roll 10d6-- with each '6'
result indicating a hit by two projectiles.  If 21-30 rounds are
fired, roll 10d6-- with each '6' result indicating a hit by three
projectiles.  Etc.  Or perhaps a +DM to hit and a damage multiplier
like in 3G3.

> Shotguns and Flechettes.
> 
> Beyond Contact, the shot is treated as a burst (see above) containing a
> number of shots equal to the number of projectiles.

Yikes!  Full auto shotguns will require thousands if dice! :P

Shotguns have always been a pain to represent accurately in any RPG.
Might I suggest simply using a +DM and a damage multiplier and be done
with it :)

Also, unless an opponent is wearing completely sealed armour, s/he
*will* take hits to the face, neck, and hands.  An individual wearing
battledress with his or her helmet and/or gloves removed should not be
considered invulnerable due to his or her superior hard armour rating.

> V. Injuries and Effects
> 
> Damage and Penetration.
> 
> When a hit has been achieved, compare the damage of the weapon used with
> the armor rating (if any) of the target.
> 
> If Damage is greater than the Armor, the difference between Damage and
> Armor is rolled to determine damage done to the target.
> 
> Example:  A weapon doing Damage 4 hits a target wearing Armor 3.  1D6 is
> rolled for actual damage to the target.

Optional Rule: if the target is wearing rigid armour that isn't fully
sealed, s/he should be subjected to the rule below for Flexible Armor
when hit by any attack made up of multiple projectiles (fragmentation,
autofire, shotgun shot, etc.).  This will represent hits to any
exposed areas of the target.

> Increased Damage.
> 
> Any to hit roll that succeeds by 5 or more results in damage being doubled
> after penetration.
> 
> Any to hit roll made by 9 or more results in damage being tripled after
> penetration.

Why '9' and not '10'?  '10' Just seems more natural and easier to
remember.

> Blowthrough.
> 
> The maximum damage done by melee weapons, slug throwers, laser, and
> fragments is based on the mass of the target:

I'd limit this to simply slug throwers.  Any swung melee weapon that
comes to a stop inside a target effectively transfers all of its
energy to that target.  Projectiles fired from firearms often do not
(and those that do are generally low-powered to begin with).

Lasers superheat flesh, causing surface explosions due to the rapidly
expanding water in the tissue.  The vapourized water and flesh also
absorb much of the energy of the laser beam, leaving little energy
left to burn a hole out the back of the victim.  In essence, most
lasers would probably drop all of their energy into the target and
would not be subjected to the Blowthrough rule (unless he was a
wabbit).

> Plasma/Fusion weapons and explosions are exempt from the Blowthrough rule.

I'm probably the only one that thinks plasma weapons *should* use the
blowthrough rule.  Plasma bolts are high velocity projectiles.  The
heat they possess would not affect the target to any great degree due
to the amount of time the bolt actually remains inside the target.
The resulting "plasma splash" (the "explosive" damage) and "heat beam"
(half the "explosive" damage) would be cumulative, however, since the
suit is now breached and will not protect the individual from the
intense heat.

Example:  EA lists a TL12 PCMP's damage as 19d6 (4d6 explosive).  In
my book, the 19d6 (kinetic energy) would be required to penetrate
anything with a really high AV.  The remaining damage would affect the
target (up to the 3d max) and the remaining energy would try to escape
out the back of the victim.  If enough energy remained to penetrate
the armour's AV again, the plasma bolt would do so and continue on
down range.

Versus TL 12 Battledress, a TL 12 PCMP would expend 8d6 penetrating
the target, 3d6 injuring the occupant, and an additional 8d6 exiting
the armour).  Versus TL 13 Battledress the plasma bolt could not
escape due to the higher armour rating, remaining inside the suit and
cooking the occupant ("Sniff, sniff, What's that smell?  Smell's like
chicken...").

But that's just me.

> Applying Damage.
> 
> Once a hit has been achieved, and the total damage has been rolled, damage
> is applied to the targets' statistics.  Damage is applied to the three
> physical characteristics (STR, DEX, END) by the target player.  Each die of
> damage is applied against a separate characteristic.

A note should be included that all AP penalties are temporary,
one-time losses (ie: they are not used to recalculate a character's AP
total-- that's what DEX and INT reduction is for).

> Telescopic Sights.
> 
> Sights are rated for magnification.  When a weapon equipped with telescopic
> sights is fired from a braced position, divide the range to the target (in
> meters) by the magnification of the sight for to hit purposes only.  Using
> a telescopic sight requires spending 4AP, which does not count as extra AP
> for aiming.

True or false... should telescopic sights only be beneficial versus
stationary or slow moving targets?  Wouldn't an evading target move
outside the sighting radius of the scope, making it awkward to keep
the sights fixed on the target?

> Zero-gravity.
> 
> Operating in a micro or zero gravity environment can be the most
> challenging combat environment for Traveller.
> 
> To maintain stability while firing in 0-g
> DEX+Environment Combat < Formidable (3D6)
> Failure results in the combatant losing orientation
> Spectacular Failure results in the loss of APs for the next turn

A task (complete with AP expenditure) for reorientating one's self
after becoming disorientated in zero gravity should be included as
well.  Until such a task is successful, further AP expenditures should
only be allowed for additional reorientation attempts.


James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 21:17:52 +0100
From: John Wood <John@elvw.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: T4.1 Skills, Craftsman

Glenn Hoppe <starcity@sk.sympatico.ca> writes,
>Glenn Grant wrote:
>> Can you rename "Craftsman" in T4.1? It rankles every time I read it. Many
>> of my characters are not men (sometimes not even human) so why use this
>> term when there are gender-free alternatives? (Imagine how you'd feel if
>> our cultural default concepts were reversed, and you were often called "a
>> great 'craftswoman' of game design"?)
>
>Agreed. No need for this. Reading "Craftsman" in T4 made me feel icky.
>
>> Call it "Handicraft", "Craftwork", or "Fabrication". (Or "Craftsophont" for
>> that matter :)
>
>What about "Artisan"? This is what TNE called a similar skill, iirc.

Sorry for the "me too", but this sounds good to me.  Craftsman doesn't 
*directly* rankle me, but my wife is a player and I know it's a big 
problem for her.  Intellectually, I also agree with the principle - 
no matter how tainted it is with the "Politically Correct" brush.

Oh, if you don't like "Artisan", how about "Crafter"?  Not quite as 
good IMO, but you may think otherwise...
 
John G. Wood  |  john@elvw.demon.co.uk  |  Oxford, United Kingdom

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1753
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Thursday, August 28 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1754



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Goodies done with CSC1.03b #1 Avanti grav speeder
[T97#1745] Pocket Empires JavaScript
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1745
Too much of a good thing
re: TNE Book for T4
Re: Winded
Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations
RE: Blowthrough
Citizens of the TML
thermoelectric coolers
Re: Updated CSC
Re: Winded
quien es mas macho:  Fifth Element o Event Horizon?
Re: winded
Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations
Re: Returned mail: Service unavailable
Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations
re: winded
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1753
Re: TNE Petition
Re: Winded
Re: Task Resolution
Traveller: Beyond The Pale... Episode 8

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 14:57:40 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: Goodies done with CSC1.03b #1 Avanti grav speeder

I've started playing with Rob Prior's CSC program. I've liked his stuff in
the past...but this time he struck pure gold, IMNSHO. This does everyhting
you would want to design, and more importantly, PLAY with designing
vehicles.

My advice: go beg/borrow/buy a Mac so you can use this program!

Here's entry 1 of a line of vehicles: 

Sufficiently Advanced Technologies, Pty. presents the newest addition to
their line of grav vehicles, the Avanti. Understated luxury and a true
thoroughbred performance vehicle. The Avanti seats four in luxurious,
quiet, grav compensated comfort, with an over 17,000 km range at up to
1750 km/hr. Avanti, for when you've arrived, just slightly faster (TM)  

Summary:
     1.00 displacement ton wedge streamlined;  6.43 tonnes;  kCr 57.6
Chassis:</DT>
     14.0 kL wedge streamlined (7.5 m long x 2.10 m wide x 1.9 m high);
Structure: 1.47 tonnes of light composite, body 0.03 cm thick, sealed (1
atm), 1 armour rating
     
Performance:
     752 kW TL12 Fusion Plus power plant;  Fuel: 2.35 L of enriched water
(2.35 kg), 10 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 750 kW contragrav;  Maximum Speed: 1749 km/h;
Range: 17427 km;  Agility: -14DM
Crew & Passengers:
     Crew roster: pilot, copilot;  2 crew stations;  2 roomy passenger
seats
Communications:
     Continental Radio (1.00 kW, TL12, SmVcl, DirAnt, DirFnd)
Sensors:
     Active Regional Radar (1.00 kW)  Resolution: 0.200 mm per km of range
Other:
Options: automatic sunroof, entertainment centre
Safety Features: anti-hijack system, anti-theft system, Roadgrid, fire
suppression system
5.43 kL of cargo space


Designed with CSC (software )Robert Prior, 1997)


Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 22:34:26 GMT
From: jeff.zeitlin@earth.execnet.com (Jeff Zeitlin)
Subject: [T97#1745] Pocket Empires JavaScript

On Mon, 25 Aug 1997 12:13:34 -0400, "Robert Eaglestone"
<eaglesto@nortel.ca> wrote:

>I wrote a little JavaScript proglet to compute a lot of
>the administratia in Pocket Empires.  It's 7.5k, so I
>won't post it here;  however, since I don't have my own
>web page anymore, where do y'all think it should go?

>Is there a page out there that manages all the little
>Traveller proglets out there?

If you e-mail it to me, I will be more than happy to look at it,
and add it to the Freelance Traveller pages.  Assuming that it
works as advertised and appears useful, would you have any
objection to my translating it into other languages?

- --=20
Jeff Zeitlin
jeff.zeitlin@earth.execnet.com

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 19:49:15 -0400 (EDT)
From: Larry Hadley <lhadley@peterboro.net>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1745

On Mon, 25 Aug 1997, "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com> wrote:
> Subject: Winded

> One of my players had a real problem with this one, but I think it is 
> a good rule.  I was hoping some of you can get my thinking straight 
[snip]
> was wearing diplo under his long coat.  The shotgun did not 
> penetrate, and I applied 2 points of blunt trauma damage since the 
> armor is flexible.
> 
> Here's where the controversey came in.
> 
> If you get shot in the chest--I don't care if you are wearing some 
> type of balliistic armor like diplo--the shit hurts!  It is still 
> like getting hit in the chest with a sledge hammer,and it will 
> probably wind you and knock you down real fast.

   This is absolutely correct. Getting hit in the chest while wearing
non-rigid armour is no picnic! Ballistic protection may save your life,
but it doesn't spare you any of the bullets energy - and an 18mm shotgun
packs a LOT of energy!!

   Rigid armour (such as BD) is an entirely different story...

   This reminds me of a guy I knew that refused to fasten the jockstrap on
his vest - his words "heck, I'd be singing in a voice only dogs can hear
anyways" ;)


- -- DLH                                 lhadley@peterboro.net

http://text.peterboro.net/~lhadley/Profile.html

  "Fight to fly, fly to fight, fight to win." - TOPGUN motto.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 18:17:04 -0700
From: "Glenn M. Goffin, Esq." <gmgoffin@pacbell.net>
Subject: Too much of a good thing

Since 6 August 1997, I've been too busy to keep up with the mailing
list. Now I'm 93 digests behind.  It's hopeless.  I need a seneschal to
digest the digest for me, and just send me an overview, with detail of
the things I'm interested in.  

Anyway, I'm just going to delete all of these messages and start reading
new digests as they come out.  I'm glad that my favorite hobby has so
much interest.  

- --Glenn

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 20:29:36 -0400 (EDT)
From: tconnor@pop3.utoledo.edu (Tim Connors)
Subject: re: TNE Book for T4

>"Dave 'Washu' Moodie" <dmoodie@st.nepean.uws.edu.au> sent:
>
>>Subject: re: TNE Book for T4
>
>
>I don't think it would be beyond the bounds of reason for IG to produce a 
>non Milleau 0 book now, wasn't that the reason Milleaus were chosen as 
>the T4 backgrounds, flexibility?
>
>I myself am pessimistic about EVER seeing a 'Milleau 1200' book by IG - 
>but I would pay good money for a TNE wrap-up book. Even if you feel that 
>IG arn't going to authorise/produce a TNE wrap-up book, if you want one, 
>send me a message saying so - and we can try to get one through the pipeline.
>
>ATB,
>
>Eamon Watters
>
        I love playing Traveller, but TNE was the only milieu I liked well
enough to forego playing to GM. I thought everything (except, maybe, the
virus) was absolutely great. If they make more stuff for it, I'll buy it.

Tim Connors

Don't lose heart
     . . . someone might want to cut it out
           . . . and they'd like to avoid a lengthy search.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 19:47:11 -0700
From: David Smart <dsmart@flash.net>
Subject: Re: Winded

Mark Urbin wrote:
> 
>    A little simple physics here.  For a shotgun blast to throw the
> human massed target back, the human massed firer would also get thrown
> back.
> 
>    The reaction of the body to the traumatic wound, in the way of
> muscle spasms, causes most of the movement by the target's body.
> 
>    Manufacturers of bullet resistant vests have done demos where someone
> wearing one of their vests (typically the CEO, talk about faith in your
> product!) stands on one leg and is shot by large handguns (.45 caliber
> for example).  They don't fall down.  They waver, wobble, and clench
> their teeth though. :-)

I take it, then, from this and the posts following the above that the
"Thud gun" should be considered useless?

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 20:49:46 -0400 (EDT)
From: tconnor@pop3.utoledo.edu (Tim Connors)
Subject: Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations

>
>>However, FF&S2 HEPlaR has horrible fuel efficiency
>>compared to the old FF&S...  Its tough.
>
>That's an error, unfortunately; the fuel efficiency was intended to stay
>exactly the same.
>
>Bruce
>
        Looks like they missed by about 40%.

        For a 932 Td hull, I figured 81.55 kl of LHyd per G-turn (1/2 hour)
from FF&S2.

        For a 900 Td Hull from FF&S, I figured 56.25 kl of LHyd per G-turn.

        That's a ((900*81.55*100)/(932*56.25)-100)% difference -- yes, I'm
too lazy to bend over to pick up my calculator which I dropped on the floor
about 2 minutes ago.

Tim Connors

Don't lose heart
     . . . someone might want to cut it out
           . . . and they'd like to avoid a lengthy search.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 97 19:05:10 -0600
From: Glenn Hoppe <starcity@sk.sympatico.ca>
Subject: RE: Blowthrough

On 1997-08-26 20:22, Eris Reddoch <eris@pen.net> posted the following:

>>It doesn't apply to battleaxi.
>
>First, beerski and now battleaxi, we're creating our own vocabulary here.
>;->

I thought it was battleaxen...

- -- 
===== Glenn Hoppe =====\ /--- MailTo:jumpspace@geocities.com ----
\ . . Enter Jumpspace --X-> http://www.geocities.com/Area51/8275 \
 ----------------------/ \========== Eschew Obfuscation ==========

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 01:21:55 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Citizens of the TML

I've neglected to post this to the list in the past so here it is
again.  Anyone wishing to be added, edited, or deleted can contact me
directly if they wish.

The URL is http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero/Citizens.html

James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 21:38:15 -0400
From: Thomas Walter Trelenberg <tomt@scri.fsu.edu>
Subject: thermoelectric coolers

'Twas written:

*********************************
There are thermo-electric units that use electricity *directly* to pump
heat from one side to the other. Staged, they could do the job nicely,
but they do use a *lot* more power.
*********************************

These are really neat....I found out about them in my teens and have
been playing with them ever since.  They are cheap (about $18 for about
a one ince square unit that will freeze a drop of water placed on it (if
properly heat sunk) at about 18V, 4A.  Actually, the drop of water would
freeze in Nevada, here in Florida the humidity is so high that so much
of a heat load gets put on the device that the drop never freezes...it
does get cold though.) and can be used as heaters simply by reversing
the polarity of the input power.  At this point they do use a lot more
power, but we had a lecturer here earlier that is doing work on
improving the efficiency.  The ones we see now are the result of work
done in the 60's (if I remember the lecture correctly) but of late there
has been a renewed interest and researchers are able to get funding
again for such projects.  The speaker said that significant gains have
been made (in laboratory devices) but conventional refrigerants are
still more efficient.  However, if you can sacrifice efficiency--in say
a society where power is dirt cheap--can anyone think of one?--there are
some advantages to using them: notably your system need have no high
pressure components.

Anyway, if anyone is interested in playing with these things first hand
I can get you the address of a very friendly company (Melcor--if you
just want to do a search on the web for yourself) that has always been
very nice about small "experimental" orders despite the "$100 minimum
order" shingle that they hang out.

Also, thanks to everyone that has thus far responded to my LaGrange
Points question....the answers have been very helpful!

TT

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 21:29:55 -0500
From: Sam Thomas <sinbad@dfw.net>
Subject: Re: Updated CSC

At 12:54 PM 8/27/97 -0400, Craig Hyett wrote:
>I just had to interject my observation here:
>
>>>
>>>Oh yes, and I've added a few weapons from EA as well.  Question: were these
>>>designed using the FFS2 system, or Greg Porter's own method?  If the
latter,
>>>can they be converted back into real-world units?
>>
>>
>>	They were probably done using Greg's system, since FF&S2 only got
>>written after EA was released.  Apparently 3G3 (Greg's system) was superior
>>to FF&S1 in many respects, and from what I can tell, so is FF&S2, so
>>quality/consistency ought not tobe that big of a problem.
>
>I have tried to build some weapons using FF&S2 and I found that the ranges
>for energy weapons (PCMP's et. al.) do not come out anywhere near those
>listed in EA.

The two systems FFS2 and 3G3 use different methods of determining range,
3G3 using the Aiming Range Class(RC) to determine the T4 range catagory ie
RC   T4 Range
1    Contact(3m)
2    Very Short(15m)
3    Short(45m)
4    Medium(150m)
5    Long(450m)
6    Very Long(1.5km)
7    Ext Long(3km)
8    Sub-Regional(10km)

In 3G3 there is no aiming RC above 8. 
Shamless Plug!!!
Greg has released version 1.1 Excel Spreadsheet for Mac and PC. It is
better than the spreadsheets you will find for any T4 to date. It will
design weapons like the ones in EA very easily. 


- -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
(c)1997 Sam Thomas  |Email:sinbad@dfw.net|
Sinbad Sam, Owner and Operator of Sinbad Sam's Saloon 
Chief Weapons Designer For Reddkneck Arms and Munitions
- -----------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 19:38:05 -0700
From: "Glenn M. Goffin, Esq." <gmgoffin@pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: Winded

> Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 15:05:11 -0400
> From: Mark Urbin <eclipse@ultranet.com>

>    Manufacturers of bullet resistant vests have done demos where someone
> wearing one of their vests (typically the CEO, talk about faith in your
> product!) stands on one leg and is shot by large handguns (.45 caliber
> for example).  They don't fall down.  They waver, wobble, and clench
> their teeth though. :-)

I'll bet that the chief of manufacturing had to do a similar demo for
senior management before product roll-out!

- --Glenn

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 19:46:32 -0700
From: "Glenn M. Goffin, Esq." <gmgoffin@pacbell.net>
Subject: quien es mas macho:  Fifth Element o Event Horizon?

This question doesn't have anything to do with The Fifth Element (which
I liked, by the way, just as I like French science fiction comic books),
but relates to Traveller.  In Event Horizon, the eponymous ship is in
free fall around Neptune, but is also in the planet's atmosphere.  Is
that possible?  I think that it is, but I solicit some scientific
perspective.  I think that it would make a good setting for a
Snapshot/Azhanti High Lightning scenario (without the Back from Hell
theme).

- --Glenn

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 19:03:56 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: winded

In mail you write:

>    It looks like we are in agreement here.  The shot end is just about the
> same  amount of 'kick'.  Rember that it's also concentrated on a smaller
> surface area than the butt of the shotgun.

Excuse me? That's an *awfully* tight pattern your shotgun has! :-)

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 22:55:51 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Macpherson <john35@wharton.upenn.edu>
Subject: Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations

 
SemoFetus@aol.com said:
 
> Well, I started work on the HEPlaR tugs last night, so I've decided how it
> works in my universe.  However, FF&S2 HEPlaR has horrible fuel efficiency
> compared to the old FF&S...  Its tough.

	Huh?  Heplar has exactly the same fuel efficiency in both 
versions.  The fuel consumption is expressed in terms of different units, 
which may be throwing you, but after casual inspection it appears exactly 
the same to me.  Do you know something I don't?

- -JM

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 16:45:33 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Returned mail: Service unavailable

In mail, shadow@krypton.rain.com writes:

> This is a MIME-encapsulated message
>
> --DAA18560.872666250/inetgate.besstrust.com
>
> The original message was received at Wed, 27 Aug 1997 03:17:28 -0400 (EDT)
> from root@localhost
>
>    ----- The following addresses have delivery notifications -----
> <leeannclark@juno.com>  (unrecoverable error)
>
>    ----- Transcript of session follows -----
> ... while talking to c.mx.juno.com.:
>>>> RCPT To:<leeannclark@juno.com>
> <<< 552 <leeannclark@juno.com>... Mail quota exceeded
> 554 <leeannclark@juno.com>... Service unavailable

Could the list admin *please* unsubscribe this person. Every time I
post anything, I get a bounce message like the above. 

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 18:39:03 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations

In mail you write:

> Well, I started work on the HEPlaR tugs last night, so I've decided how it
> works in my universe.  However, FF&S2 HEPlaR has horrible fuel efficiency
> compared to the old FF&S...  Its tough.

Still, it's not like you have to get the ships up to huge velocities.
Consider, if a ship jumps in and is 100,000 km away, at 30 km/sec, it
takes less than an hour to get to you. So the tug just needs to boost
the ship up to that speed, then slow it down again when it gets close.
(Note, the tugs will be aiming the ships to "just miss" the base. That
way, if there's a problem and they can't brake it in time, it'll just
sail on past, and another tug can rescue the ship and tug.

For that matter, if a ship just wants to refuel and not "visit" (hey,
even a station like yours is a break from staring at your own ship's
bulkheads) then you could just let it sit and have the tug boost out a
"fuel bladder" (cheap, collapsible tank). That'll use a lot less fuel
than dragging in the ship and then dragging it back out. /Instead of
moving the mass of the ship one way and the ship plus fuel the other,
you're moving a tank plus fuel one way and an empty tank the other way.

Duh! I just realized that given that this is a deep space hex, you
don't *need* a tank! At the temps that far away from a star, you can
store hydrogen as a *solid*. So you just cover it with a flexible
plastic "bubble" and push it to wherever. Then a small heater will
liquefy the stuff as fast as you can pump it. The bubble is just to
keep the liquid from evaporating or wandering away.

And the ships won't mind getting LH2 at just above freezing. It makes
it easier for their systems to keep it liquid.

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 97 22:10:50 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: re: winded

On 08/27/97 at 01:33 PM,  Mark Urbin <eclipse@ultranet.com> said:

>>Well, I guess you are right for the most part, but...tell you what?  Take a
>>12 gauge shotgun place the butt firmly against your chest and pull the
>>trigger. The kick *might* not knock you down, but it won't be a fun
>>experience, and it will certainly rock you back.

>   No thanks.  The kick would not knock me down.  One of the advantages of
>massing over a hundred kilos.  It will rock me, possible crack a rib.  It
>will hurt like a bastard. 

Yeah, I mass less than seventy, so I'd be "ass over teakettle", and I feel
absolutely sure I'd break *something*..breastbone, ribs, my neck when I hit
the ground. ;->

> Hmmm...sounds like people describing begin hit by a shotgun blast while >wearing a decent kevlar vest.

Yep.

>   I guess the physics do work out. :-)

Ah, yep. We are in agreement on the general effect.  

I'm just pointing out that a large bore shotgun has enough of a kick to get
your attention.  It's *not* at all like firing a light rifle.

Eris
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 23:26:08 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Macpherson <john35@wharton.upenn.edu>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1753

 
On Wed, 27 Aug 1997 17:44:10 GMT, James Lindsay wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Aug 1997 10:09:28 -0500, Joseph R. Dietrich wrote: 
> > Slugs do not have a lot of kinetic energy. What they have is a lot of 
> >momentum.
> 
> This isn't true.  Momentum is directly related to kinetic energy.  As
> momentum is lost, so is kinetic energy.  If a projectile has lots of
> momentum, it also has lots of KE.

	Both of you are a little off.  First of all, slugs have a lot of 
kinetic energy, but not a lot of momentum -- Joseph had it reversed.  
While James is right in saying that momentum is related to kinetic 
energy, they are not as closely related as he seems to think.

	Kinetic Energy = .5*Mass*(Velocity)^2
	Momentum = Mass*Velocity
	
An example:
	A bullet that masses 50g and has a velocity of 1000m/s 
(it's a big, high velocity bullet)  has a Momentum=50 and a KE=25,000
	A bowling ball massing 5000g (5Kg) with a velocity of 10m/s 
also has a Momentum=50 but only has a KE=250.

	This basic physics note has been brought to you by your friendly 
neighborhood social scientist. :-)

- -JM

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 21:48:23 -0800
From: Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca>
Subject: Re: TNE Petition

> I think TNE fans deserve a conclusion
>to their milleau.

Empress Iolanthe (sp?) wakes up to see Strephon taking a shower...

- --
Richard Hough
rdhough@orca.bc.ca

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 21:40:16 -0800
From: Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca>
Subject: Re: Winded

>Slugs do not have a lot of kinetic energy. What they have is a lot of
>momentum.

Well, this depends on what you mean by "a lot", but for comparative
purposes KE is proportional to velocity squared while momentum is
proportional to plain velocity. If we consider a bullet to have 'a lot' of
velocity, then it would have 'a lot' squared KE but only 'a lot' of
momentum. In this case I would disagree with your claim and say that slugs
actually have a lot of KE but not much momentum.

However, if by "slug" you are referring to a shell-less terrestrial
invertebrate, then I would agree with you, assuming a slightly different
base point for "a lot".

- --
Richard Hough
rdhough@orca.bc.ca

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 00:46:22 -0400
From: Bill Rutherford <worj@topgun.cinecom.com>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

At 10:43 PM 8/26/97 EST, DSummers wrote:
<Snip>...
>Well...
>a) That there is a problem is a matter of opinion.
>b) That a majority want it "fixed" is also debatable.
>
>All, you can say is that there is vocal faction...

During the last Task Debate, wasn't there a poll taken of listmembers
regarding which task system was preferred - KBv2.0, T4, and, I think, one
other?  IIRC, didn't the feedback suggest that many listmembers DID want
something other than stock T4 task resolution? This suggests that there WAS
a perception by a number of listmembers that there existed (exists) a
problem and also that a number of listmembers wanted it fixed. Certainly
the participating faction was vocal, but, again IIRC, weren't they ALSO
numerous?  

If one of you has retained the results (Kenneth - YOU must've!) would you
mind reposting them?



Bill Rutherford
worj@topgun.cinecom.com

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 01:03:20 -0400
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: Traveller: Beyond The Pale... Episode 8

	Just ran the eighth session of my latest campaign, titled
Traveller: Beyond The Pale.  Here's the post-game summary:

The Cast:

Amr Santayema: a young and sneaky merchant, played by the TML's own Ross
Coburn.

Lt Kehaaarl: An Aslan ex-marine.  Big, bad, furry.  Quote of the week: "Amr
reminds me of a pushok".  Apparently a pushok is a sot of flying snake with
an anaesthetic bite...

Sir Loreni Vilash: Quote of the week: "My character's INT is A?  Wow!
Maybe I should start playing him that way then!".

Perlis Dalal: and here's Perlis, sashaying down the runway in an
oh-so-feminine  Cloth-II Scout-issue jumpsuit in a delicate shade of
Imperial Safety Orange, and accessorized by a pair of charming combat boots
and an ACR-12.  Played by the TML's Glenn Grant.

They're joined this week by Ezekiel Harper, an ex-Navy gunner with a highly
colourful and shady past, played by a non-TML'er.  Been on board not more
than a day and he's already been in a fistfight with his former employer
and managed to annoy Amr.



	Last week, after fleeing Mishegaan III, they jumped into the first
system of the Shugilli cluster, and established contact with the locals,
after an eventful week in jump spent finding severed heads in their
ventilation ducts.  As we closed last week, they were headed towards a
rendezvous with a largish double-torus habitat in geosynchronous orbit
around the system mainworld, Maaliikaa.

	The Versailles gracefully matched velocities with the habitat, and
after the fact that they were not carrying any virulently contagious
diseases was established, prepared to transfer an Away Team headed by the
Versailles' Executive Officer, Amr, who fortunately looks nothing like
Commander Riker.  Ross and Jonathan Frakes, on the other hand...  Perlis,
Elo (their sensors tech who has descended to NPC status since his player
bailed), and Amr suited up and prepared for an EVA.

	Meanwhile, on board the Laughing Sandbag (a beat-up70-year-old
Jump-3 trader), captained by one Firduba Mipaa , Ezekiel was stalwartly
sitting at his post in the sandcaster turret when the ship violently
precipitated out of jump somewhat closer to the planet than optimal.  A
brief exchange of less-than-complimentary words was had between Ezekiel and
the astrogator.

	As the Away Team (don't worry, I'm only calling it that to annoy
Rik..., er, Ross) made a somewhat less-than-optimal EVA across to the
station, Sir Loreni recieved a call from Captain Mipaa.  Captain Mipaa,
secretly jealous of the fact that his wife (the ship's astrogator) had been
flirting (and in fact, much worse than that) with Ezekiel, had decided that
he was simply going to foist Ezekiel off on Sir Loreni, who he knew was
short one gunner anyhow.  Mipaa told Sir Loreni that sadly, his wife had
taken a dislike to Ezekiel, and that since she really ran things on board,
he was asking a favour of Sir Loreni in hiring Ezekiel.  Sir Loreni agreed
to meet the two of them after the Laughing Sandbag rendezvoused with the
station.  Mipaa then informed Ezekiel of this fact.  After accepting the
deal, Ezekiel quickly called Mrs. Mipaa to arrange for one last quick
tryst, and went to pack his bags.

	Meanwhile, back at the station, the Away Team=81 was being given the
royal treatment; greeted by the station's crew (who were all wearing the
most amazingly flamboyantly coloured clothing), they were given a tour of
the station's facilities (among which was a primitive crystaliron factory).
All in all the locals seemed extremely impressed and overjoyed to finally
have been recontacted.  A couple of hours after they'd rendezvoused, a
spaceplane docked with the station, bearing the professor of Vilani who'd
been dragooned in to translate for them and three Officials of the 8th
Rank, who were there to negotiate details surrounding a welcoming ceremony
at the local downport.

	Meanwhile, the Laughing Sandbag rendezvoused with the Versailles,
and docked, with Captain Mipaa and Ezekiel heading across to the
Versailles.  They were greeted by Sir Loreni and Kehaaarl.  While Kehaaarl
took Ezekiel off to the sandcaster turret to evaluate his abilities
(Ezekiel having Gunnery-4, Kehaaarl was suitably impressed), Sir Loreni led
Captain Mipaa on a tour of the Versailles.  While Ezekiel was putting the
sandcaster through its paces, he struck up a conversation with Kehaarl,
which turned to the niceties of when to use armed force and similarly
bloody-minded topics.  After Kehaaarl was satisfied that Ezekiel was indeed
as qualified as he was supposed to be, they returned to the lounge to join
the two captains.  After deciding to hire Ezekiel, the four of them
proceeded to the airlock, where Ezekiel, in saying goodbye to his former
employer, whispered to him the dreadful truth about his wife's infidelity.
Captain Mipaa understandably freaked, landing a good punch on Ezekiel
before Kehaaarl separated them.  Mipaa then foolishly hit Kehaaarl, who
simply roared in his face, terrifying him.  After the shaken Mipaa beat a
hasty exit, Sir Loreni enquired of Ezekiel whether whatever had caused that
particular problem was likely to recur.  After Ezekiel told him that it
wasn't, they returned to the lounge.

	Shortly thereafter, Sir Loreni recieved a call from Amr;
negotiations had reached a stage where Sir Loreni's presence was required.
While Ezekiel helped himself to a beer out of the Versailles' extremely
well-stocked wet bar (the late and lamented Dame Berek'san having
transferred her personal stock of liquor on board back on Mishegaan III).
The Away Team=AE returned and Sir Loreni and Kehaaarl headed across to the
station, following the tether-line the Away Team had left.

	Amr and Perlis found Ezekiel sitting in the conversation pit
working on a beer.  Amr and Ezekiel immediately hit it off on the wrong
foot, with Amr trying to pull authority and being undermined by Perlis's
rolling her eyes at some of his more extreme claims.  Ezekiel was likewise
somewhat to blame for the friction, refusing to negotiate his contract with
Amr, preferring to deal with Sir Loreni.  However, both sides eventually
became somewhat more rational and a deal was reached and quarters were
assigned to Ezekiel.  Amr headed to the bridge to research the commercial
potential of the planet, while Perlis sat down to have a beer with Ezekiel
and bring him up to date on the various crew gossip.

	Some time later, after concluding the details of the Welcoming
Ceremony with the Officials on board the station, Sir Loreni and Kehaaarl
(who had been met with a great deal of awe and surprise by the station
crew) returned to the Versailles, bringing the three Officials and some of
the station crew across for a tour of the ship.  Drinks were served and
hospitality flowed.

	After their guests had departed, Kehaaarl visited Ezekiel in his
quarters to register his weapons; Ezekiel proved to be in the possession of
a broadsword, a magnum revolver, a body pistol, and a TL-12 laser hunting
rifle.  After some discussion of hunting in general and an agreement to go
hunt together some time was reached, Kehaaarl enquired as to why captain
Mipaa had attacked Ezekiel.  Much confusion ensued, as Kehaaarl, whose
command of Galanglic was limited, understood the expression "had a fling
with the captain's wife" as involving physically throwing her about.
Kehaaarl, after being remarkably confused by Ezekiel's idiomatic galanglic,
and even more confused by the nature of human sexual morality or complete
lack thereof, took his leave and went to talk to Sir Loreni.  Shortly
thereafter, the crew tucked in for the evening.

	The next day, Sir Loreni, Perlis, Kehaaarl, and Leilei (their
engineer; visualize a 50ish Vilani earth mother who doesn't so much
maintain her power plant and drives as she nutures them) crossed over to
the station and boarded a spaceplane for the trip to the planet's downport,
joined by the crew of the Locust-class Frontier Trader, which had also
arrived in-system.  Captain Mipaa, on the other hand, elected to fly his
vessel down to the surface.  Amr, Ezekiel, Elo, and Kurek (the other
gunner/steward) stayed on board the Versailles, which remained up in orbit.
The Laughing Sandbag and their passenger spaceplane was escorted through
de-orbit and re-entry by a half-dozen military spaceplanes.

	After re-entry, they descended through dense cloud for a fairly
long time, finally breaking through the cloud bottoms at 500 meters
altitude into a gray and rainy overcast day (which is the usual forecast
for the planet, actually).  Their destination proved to be a massively
built-up island, surrounded by oil platforms; the whole scene would have
looked like something out of Blade Runner if it hadn't been for the fact
that the buildings were uniformly painted in extremely garish hues.  They
swept in for a landing, taxied over to the appropriate spot on the tarmac,
and proceeded to disembark... whereupon they were greeted by an atmosphere
with pressure nearly three times Earth normal, high humidity, and
temperature in the low forties on the celsius scale.

	Back up on the ship, the rest of the crew watched the whole
ceremony, picking up a local news media broadcast.  The Maaliikaani were
throwing the whole kitchen sink into the ceremony; fireworks, honour
guards, small children bearing bouquets of flowers, and of course speeches;
the only hitch occurred when Leilei failed her endurance roll and passed
out from the heat.  Eventually they were all bundled into limousines,
driven off to a cultural center, and from there to a lavish dinner
reception.  We closed the session with them settling into their lavish
hotel rooms.

Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1754
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Thursday, August 28 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1755



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

A Task System(s) for all!
Re: Task Resolution
Re:  Vargr & Aslan (was Re: Blowthrough)
Re: Task Resolution
Re: winded
Re: TNE Petition
Kinetic Energy vs. Momentum
Re: quien es mas macho:  Fifth Element o Event Horizon?
Re: Winded
Re: A Task System(s) for all!
Shutting Down
Re: Little black books (was RE: Binders and other Trivia)
Re: Task Resolution
Re: Fusion+, fuel and stuff
Re: Boredom and homicidal insanity in Traveller
RE: Traveller-digest V1997 #1731
Re: TNE Petition
Re: Winded
RE: Blowthrough
Re: Boredom and homicidal insanity in Traveller

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 16:24:54 +1000 (EST)
From: "Dave 'Washu' Moodie" <dmoodie@st.nepean.uws.edu.au>
Subject: A Task System(s) for all!

Maybe the system should be made even more generic, so that even the dice
involved are up to the GM - so T4 could refer to tasks in a general manner
eg diff/skill, time etc like in MT but contain a few suggestions as to
some different dice methods.

I understand that 2d6's produce a bell curve distribution and d20's
produce linear etc. etc. But all the book needs is a chapter detailing
optional methods and their relative probability curves.

I know this sounds like extra fuss, but it saves others fussing around
trying to devise their own when they could just pick out one that they
like from a series of options - then everyone can have their cake and eat
it too ^-^
							'M.'Dmoodie  

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 00:10:07 -0700
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

Thu, 28 Aug 1997 00:46:22 -0400, Bill Rutherford <worj@topgun.cinecom.com>
>During the last Task Debate, wasn't there a poll taken of listmembers
>regarding which task system was preferred - KBv2.0, T4, and, I think, one
>other?  IIRC, didn't the feedback suggest that many listmembers DID want
>something other than stock T4 task resolution?

There was a poll.  It didn't have any indictation that those who felt
stats should count more than skills were in the majority (though it
was really designed that way).  However, it was also a poll that was
based on those who chose to respond, which has the same problems as
basing things on those who choose to post.  The fact is that it is
hard to, without polling every person, judge popular opinion.  To
even try requires scientific sampling and all the rest (and even
that can be falable).  Anything less is guesswork.

____________________________
Summers@Alum.MIT.edu

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 23:27:02 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Re:  Vargr & Aslan (was Re: Blowthrough)

Eris Reddoch wrote

>  If Vargr average 70% of humans in
> mass then is it *possible* their average STR and/or EDU should be     > closer to 5 than 7?

I assume you meant STR & END not STR and EDU.

Yes it is possible.  However wolves are, pound for pound, stronger than
humans so Vargr could be as well. END is more subjective than STR is and
before we say that Vargr have a lower END we need to define END.

> And if the Aslan average 150% human average (or more) then is it
> possible they should *average* 10+?  Just more grist for the mill...;->

Yes it is possible.  I think that TNE and MT were right to give Aslan
STR +2 and END +2 rather than the +1 to each which CT did.  Plus 1 to
Strength means that Aslan average less than 1 standard deviation
stronger. I hope that T4 gives them +2 to STR and END as well.

However I should note that large bonuses to stats will make the Aslan
objectively superior _for_a_Munchkin_player_ than humans are.  It might
be better to require minimum stats as well as give bonuses.

As an example Aslan might require a starting STR of 6+ and then gain a
+2 to whatever their STR was.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 02:34:17 +0000
From: Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

Bill Rutherford wrote:

> If one of you has retained the results (Kenneth - YOU must've!) would you
> mind reposting them?

No, sorry Bill.  I didn't keep it, but at last count there were some 85
TML list members who said that they thought there was a problem with the
T4 task system.

That problem was that a Level-4 medic could have a lower chance of
success than a level-1 medic, if the novice's stat was high enough.

Now, when it got down to fixing that problem, there was a lot more
dissention about how to fix it.  Before I left the list, there was no
one system perceived as the cure-all for T4's woes.

I think the big factions were the MT task system and KBv2.0, but there
wasn't enough support for either to say one was better than the other.

The main point here is that a number of people do think that T4 has a
problem with the stat vs skill issue.

Kenneth.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 02:33:53 -0500
From: "Joseph R. Dietrich" <yikes@evansville.net>
Subject: Re: winded

>I bet you anything that he was fully braced to receive the blow, just
>like the shooter.  Most body armour wouldn't stand up to assault rifle
>ammunition (5.56mm NATO) so either the propellent charge for the round
>was lower than average or the body armour was the higher threat type.

Yes, he was ready to be shot and braced himself by setting a wide
stance. You are also correct in assuming that it was high-threat body
armor, IIRC. Blew stuffing all over the place too, but stopped the
bullet. It would have been a 7.62 x 39mm round (I'm sure it was an SK or
something similar) -- no way of telling what load he had in the
cartridge.

Following the effects portrayed in many movies, however, you would have
expected him to go flying through the air and smashing through a
plate-glass window (even though he was in a grassy field). ;)

>I'm not sure what (if any) units are used to measure "momentum".
>Kinetic Energy, OTOH, is easily calculated using a simple formula:
>
>        2
>KE=0.5MV
>
>With it, you can calculate the KE of a bullet or a bowling ball.

I was incorrect in my use of momentum (which is m*v). What I thought it
meant when I wrote it was "a body's resistance to change in motion"
(i.e., inertia). What I was getting at was that bullets, in general, do
not impart their momentum to a target. Rather, they retain their inertia
and keep going, destroying tissue along the way. Many times they will
completely penetrate a target without expending all of their energy
(which, I think, is the concept behind blowthrough). Of course, a vest
forces the target to absorb almost all of the energy, which would smart
a bit. I don't think it would be enough to send you tumbling, though.

A M-16A2 has a muzzle velocity of, say, about 1000 m/s and fires a
5.56mm bullet that masses about 4 grams (these are approximations). It's
KE would be:

KE=.5(.004kg) x (1 000 m/s)^2
  =.5(.004kg) x (1 000 000 m^2/s^2)
  =.5(4000N*m)
  =2000 J


A bowling ball weighs around 5 kg, doesn't it? Anyone know how fast
could you throw one of those suckers? :)

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 03:56:45 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: Re: TNE Petition

Richard Hough writes:

>> I think TNE fans deserve a conclusion
>>to their milleau.
>
>Empress Iolanthe (sp?) wakes up to see Strephon taking a shower...

   And artistic integrity is neatly wadded up into a ball and discarded
out the window...

   While we're at it, we can rewrite "Hamlet" so that everybody lives
and instead goes on a shopping spree to Harrod's.

Regards,

Harold

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 08:06:08 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Kinetic Energy vs. Momentum

On Wed, 27 Aug 1997 23:26:08 -0400 (EDT), John Macpherson wrote:

> On Wed, 27 Aug 1997 17:44:10 GMT, James Lindsay wrote:
> > On Wed, 27 Aug 1997 10:09:28 -0500, Joseph R. Dietrich wrote: 
> > > Slugs do not have a lot of kinetic energy. What they have is a lot of 
> > >momentum.
> > 
> > This isn't true.  Momentum is directly related to kinetic energy.  As
> > momentum is lost, so is kinetic energy.  If a projectile has lots of
> > momentum, it also has lots of KE.
> 
> 	Both of you are a little off.  First of all, slugs have a lot of 
> kinetic energy, but not a lot of momentum -- Joseph had it reversed.  
> While James is right in saying that momentum is related to kinetic 
> energy, they are not as closely related as he seems to think.
> 
> 	Kinetic Energy = .5*Mass*(Velocity)^2
> 	Momentum = Mass*Velocity
> 	
> An example:
> 	A bullet that masses 50g and has a velocity of 1000m/s 
> (it's a big, high velocity bullet)  has a Momentum=50 and a KE=25,000
> 	A bowling ball massing 5000g (5Kg) with a velocity of 10m/s 
> also has a Momentum=50 but only has a KE=250.
> 
> 	This basic physics note has been brought to you by your friendly 
> neighborhood social scientist. :-)

Thanks, "friendly neighbourhood social scientist"!  :)

Actually, what are the units for momentum?  Metre-grams per second?
KE is measured in Joules.  What is momentum measured in (I was
probably asleep in class when they mentioned that "mass*velocity"
thing)?

James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 08:06:07 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: quien es mas macho:  Fifth Element o Event Horizon?

On Wed, 27 Aug 1997 19:46:32 -0700, Glenn M. Goffin, Esq. wrote:

> This question doesn't have anything to do with The Fifth Element (which
> I liked, by the way, just as I like French science fiction comic books),
> but relates to Traveller.  In Event Horizon, the eponymous ship is in
> free fall around Neptune, but is also in the planet's atmosphere.  Is
> that possible?  I think that it is, but I solicit some scientific
> perspective.  I think that it would make a good setting for a
> Snapshot/Azhanti High Lightning scenario (without the Back from Hell
> theme).

Ah, Glenn... maybe you *should* read the last few digests that you
just deleted :)

Apparently, the list's answer was no.  The turbulence present in
Neptune's atmosphere would disrupt its orbit in no time.

James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 09:21:35 +0100
From: Stewart Eyres <spe@astro.keele.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Winded

Hi there

Well, I think that plenty of people have explained momentum & KE.
This also explains the difference between the firer and the target
from the point of view of momentum etc.

To modify the soc. scientist's example (thanks JM):


	A bullet that masses 50 g and has a velocity of 1000 m/s 
(it's a big, high velocity bullet)  has a Momentum=50 Ns and a KE=25,000 J
	A rifle massing 5000 g (5 kg) must have the same momentum in the
opposite direction as the bullet it just fired, ie. 50 Ns, so its
velocity (into the firer's body) is 10 m/s, and its KE is only 250 J

[note nifty use of units to show that I'm a scientist in the
mass-media sense]

I think the important thing is acutally the "impulse", that is the
change in momentum over the time it takes (which is momentum/time =
force) diluted over the area applied to the relevant body (force/area
= pressure).  Say the transfer of momentum from the bullet to the
rifle to the firer takes place over 0.1 seconds (I'm guessing), then
the impulsive force felt is 500 N.  This is spread over the rifle butt
(guessing again 15 cm x 5 cm = 0.0075 m*m), giving an impulsive
pressure (force/area) of about 67,000 N/m*m on the shoulder (about 2/3
atmospheric pressure).  The bullet takes about 1/100,000 seconds to
impart its impulse to the target (time to travel the length of a 1 cm
bullet at 1000 m/s - I know that bullet-target interaction, etc. means
that not all the energy or momentum is transfered at once, but this
will get a reasonable estimate), so the impulse is 50*100,000 = 5 MN.
The area of the bullet is say 0.1 cm x 0.1 cm (guessing!) = 1/1000,000
m*m, so the impulsive pressure on the target is then 5,000,000 MN/m*m!
Hence, the firer does not suffer as much as the target.  I know that
my numbers are far off, especially the times, but I think unless I am
doing something outstandingly dumb, a difference of 7.5 million is
going to be difficult to knock down.

Didn't someone mention physics as a gaming system sometime back?

Stewart Eyres <spe@astro.keele.ac.uk>

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 08:29:23 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: A Task System(s) for all!

On Thu, 28 Aug 1997 16:24:54 +1000 (EST), Dave 'Washu' Moodie wrote:

> 
> Maybe the system should be made even more generic, so that even the dice
> involved are up to the GM - so T4 could refer to tasks in a general manner
> eg diff/skill, time etc like in MT but contain a few suggestions as to
> some different dice methods.
> 
> I understand that 2d6's produce a bell curve distribution and d20's
> produce linear etc. etc. But all the book needs is a chapter detailing
> optional methods and their relative probability curves.
> 
> I know this sounds like extra fuss, but it saves others fussing around
> trying to devise their own when they could just pick out one that they
> like from a series of options - then everyone can have their cake and eat
> it too ^-^

This was discussed a few months ago during the Task Wars(tm) debate.
It was decided that different task systems would end up having
different potential results for success, failure, SS, and SF.  For
example, a Difficult Climbing task for a character with DEX-8
Climbing-2 might have a 58% chance of success with one system and only
a 43% chance with another system (I'm just pulling these numbers out
of the air).  No task system is perfect enough to cover *all*
potential situations equally well and some systems work better with
high stat+skill ratings while others might work better with average
stat+skill ratings.  The problem then becomes how the author of a
particular Traveller adventure module describes (in task terms) what
he thinks should be a 50% probability of success for an average
character with average skills.  IOW, die rolls using one task system
could be noticeably harder to succeed with than in an identical game
(and identical tasks) using another task system.



James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 09:53:43 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Shutting Down

This station goes off the air to keep the flame 0850 GMT, due to relocation
to EuroGenCon.

Catch you all Tuesday.

Dom

PS please don't have *another* mail box devouring task war....

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"Omnia Mutantur Nihil Interit"  -  Sandman 'The Wake'
"Everything Changes, but nothing is truly lost" 

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 01:07:26 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: Little black books (was RE: Binders and other Trivia)

Douglas wrote:
>At 07:08 AM 8/25/97 +0100, Simon wrote:
>
>I wrote:
>>I> The first thing I did with FFS2 was take it down to Kinko's and have the
>>> binding cut off.  Then I put everything into page protectors and shoved the
>>> whole shebang into a binder.
>
>>And my flatmate said I was the saddest person in the Universe when I did
>this
>>with FF&S ... hah, now I can prove I'm "normal" :-)
>
>Using me as a reference for anything "normal" is not recommended.  See my
>web pages for a good reason for this.  :)

"Normality" is a state of mind governed by the K'Kree,,, sorry, herd. By
definition, you are a role player and that ain't *normal*!

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"Omnia Mutantur Nihil Interit"  -  Sandman 'The Wake'
"Everything Changes, but nothing is truly lost" 

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 09:39:48 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

David and Kenneth playfully sparred and said:

>Tue, 26 Aug 1997 19:33:52 +0000, Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com>
>>David P. Summers wrote:
>>> All, you can say is that there is vocal faction.  Your
>>> posts alone do a lot to keep the debate going.  The fact
>>> that it keeps getting raised doesn't prove it's right or
>>> popular anymore than similar controversies proved that
>>> most people knew that Vincent Foster was murdered.
>
>>Why do you have to go and be a butt?
>
>And why do you have to hit personal attacks?  The fact is that
>you present the idea that skills count as much stats as a problem
>that the majority agree with you that it is a problem.  Both of
>these are highly debatable.  (and in fact have been highly debated :-)
>
>> You asked a simple question.  I
>>gave you a simple, polite answer, and you decide that it is time to cut
>>somebody down for answering you question.
>
>I didn't ask the question.  I did get tired of you simply asserting
>your point of view as if your view is the only one that has any
>support.  I responded to a post that presents a view I disagree with,
>something you yourself have never been shy about.

Please stop this *now* - from the last Great Task War we know that neither
of you will back down and that you have opposing positions. Marc has made
his choice on the task system - Kenneth has valid reasons for having
problems with (with which I do sympathise) and David has long argued for
something similar to T4 IIRC (which I can also sympathise with). However,
T4.1 is the system we are getting, and it is a tweaked and better working
T4 (having used it since Marc posted it I'm *reasonably* happy with it).

So please don't start this again...

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"Omnia Mutantur Nihil Interit"  -  Sandman 'The Wake'
"Everything Changes, but nothing is truly lost" 

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 10:01:49 +0100
From: Simon Early <sre@taz.compulink.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Fusion+, fuel and stuff

  
> Isotopically pure (99.996% minimum) is UK pounds 127.60 / 50 g
> 99.9% atom % is UK L70.10 / 100g

That is expensive.  Thanks for the info.

<later>

I've had a read of the Encyclopedia Brittanica (see info below) and done a few 
quick sums that show me that $1.5 million / m3 is a believeable cost for 1997 
heavy water production by electrolysis, based on 8 cents/kWh electricity 
(European domestic rates - industry gets it cheaper) and assuming the (at 
least) 375,000 kmol of hydrogen by-product is not sold.  The hydrogen 
by-product is "worth" in 1997 around $20,000 (fuel value) up to, say, $100,000 
as chemicals ... pretty small beer compared to the $1.5 million for the heavy 
water, so I can believe that the H2 is not recovered.  We could hypothesis that 
the hydrogen can be recombined in a fuel cell to provide some of the power to 
run the electrolysis in the first place, but this increases the capital cost of 
the plant.  In 1997, fuel cells are not a capitally efficient way to make 
electricity (but will be in the next decade).

For some reason, I remembered the abundance of D2O was much more than 1:6760 
(where did I get that 2% figure from?), which will cause me to revise my 
earlier eastimate of Cr 50/m3 for the cost of production.  As a maximum we can 
estimate that it is 6760 x L-hyd cost (Cr 500 / te = Cr 2 per kmol for L-Hyd), 
which gives Cr 750,000 per m3 of heavy water.

Despite the above analysis, I still believe that heavy water will be cheap to 
produce in the Traveller universe because the "byproduct" hydrogen is used as 
fusion fuel.  Heavy water will will be vastly expensive if fusion+ were the 
principal power source in use on a world (as no-one uses the L-hyd) and be 
relatively cheap where virtually no fusion+ is in use (lots of L-hyd for 
conventional fusion).

All of this calculation has made my head hurt, and reminded me that L-hyd is 
expensive in Traveller (compared to 1997 steam reforming processes), but that 
this higher price is reasonable for the fusion-based economic model.  I must 
repeat my calculations of many years ago and post them on the TML.


For those who want to know a bit more background to my heavy water figures 
above, here is the info from the Encyclopedia Brittanica: 

<quote>

Ordinary water as obtained from most natural sources contains about one 
deuterium atom for every 6,760 ordinary hydrogen atoms. If water is 
electrolyzed the gas produced at the cathode is mostly hydrogen, and thus the 
residual water is enriched in deuterium content. Continued electrolysis of 
hundreds of litres of water until only a few millilitres remain yields 
practically pure deuterium oxide. This operation, until 1943 the only 
large-scale method used, has been superseded by less expensive processes, 
such as fractional distillation (D2O becomes concentrated in the liquid 
residue because it is less volatile than H2O). The heavy water produced is 
used as a moderator of neutrons in nuclear power plants. In the laboratory 
heavy water is employed as an isotopic tracer in studies of chemical and 
biochemical processes.

<end quote>


Since the cost of electrolysis is (chiefly) determined by the cost of energy, 
fusion-powered societies will have cheap heavy water.  In fact, I now realise, 
heavy water will be the byproduct of water-based L-Hyd production.  Assuming 
that L-hyd is the more common fusion fuel and that deuterium is used as "high 
grade fuel" for the smaller fusion+ power plants, then the price of heavy 
water will tend to vary depending on the relative consumption of fusion MW and 
fusion+ MW on any given world.  It could be a good commodity to trade in M:0 
:-).

"Yes, we are very proud of this Ministry of Peace L-Hyd production facility.  
We have not succumbed to the blandishments of the Imperialist Cleon and his 
fusion+ sales lackeys ... in fact we sell our heavy water, previously a waste 
product, to the Imperialist traders to support the glorious achievements of 
the mother-world.  The traders sell the heavy water to capitalists-in-waiting 
on the lap-dog worlds that seek alliance with Cleon's self-proclaimed empire. 
 The dialectic proves ...."  <editors note: the polical speech continues for 
some time.  The full text is available from Imperial News Network archives.  
Use access ID 342-002#345-22-99-47>



Simon

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 05:17:35 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Boredom and homicidal insanity in Traveller

In a message dated 97-08-27 08:06:17 EDT, you write:

<<=20
 >         Cause you also forgot another Trav mental health failing; the
 > alcoholism (spaceport bars have far too important a role in the game,
IMHO)
 > :).
=20
  >>
T4.1 makes a point of avoiding specific reference to alcohol (and
drugs).Doesn't this sound genteel?

At its tables, people meet and enjoy light music or video, conversation, =
and
meals.=20

Marc

UNOFFICIAL FACILITIES
	Not all facilities at a starport come under the jurisdiction of the Port
Authority.=20
	The Scout Lounge. Those who conduct surveys of star systems and who
continually venture out into unexplored or under-explored space are a spe=
cial
type of people. After long periods of time alone or with their fellow cre=
w,
they naturally gravitate to others of their kind... to share stories and
experiences which may help them survive. The typical starport has a Scout
Lounge for this type of people.
	The Scout Lounge is usually operates as a semi-private club; theoretical=
ly
anyone can use its services, but in practice it is only patronized
comfortably by scouts (and those with an affinity for scouts).
	The Hiring Hall. Crew members looking for work gather at the hiring hall.
Ships calling at the starport look first to the hiring hall when they nee=
d
new or replacement crew. Because of ship schedules which must be met, it =
is
possible for a crew person to be hired and off world within a few hours
notice.
	The Lone Star. Many starports have a recreation facility which welcomes =
and
serves all comers. At its tables, people meet and enjoy light music or vi=
deo,
conversation, and meals. To many the Lone Star is an opportunity to meet
others on a casual basis, to develop acquaintances, and even grow them in=
to
friendships.
	The Traveller=92s Aid Society. Some individuals make travel their primar=
y
vocation. If they are able, they join the Traveller=92s Aid Society, whic=
h
provides facilities to its members. The Traveller=92s Aid Society is a jo=
int
operation of several large hotel chains, which provide the facilities wit=
hin
or adjacent to their own hotels and restaurants.
	Members join by depositing a large sum of money as annuity, with the
proceeds paying for the benefits they receive.
	Startown. Although starports are often established near large cities, th=
e
community which springs up at the gates to the starport has come to be ca=
lled
(generically) Startown. This community is the home of many of the starpor=
t
employees and houses many stores, restaurants, and meeting places that se=
rve
those who want to wander outside of the starport=92s boundaries.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 16:03:17 +0100
From: "Harker, Mike" <mike.harker@ntu.ac.uk>
Subject: RE: Traveller-digest V1997 #1731

The most current information I have to hand here at the Nottingham
Business School is that individuals graduating now or in the next few
years are widely expected to have an average of 7 (seven) different
"career positions" before they retire. Additionally, many commentators
see the increasing dependence on intellectual rather than physical
skills pushing up the average age or retirement to 75-80, shudder.

Mike.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 13:40:48 +2
From: "RFXn" <mlaakso@utu.fi>
Subject: Re: TNE Petition

On 27 Aug 97 at 21:48, Richard Hough wrote:

> > I think TNE fans deserve a conclusion
> >to their milleau.
> 
> Empress Iolanthe (sp?) wakes up to see Strephon taking a shower...

Which one(s) of them? ;)

/RFXn     mlaakso@utu.fi        aka. Matti Laakso
 -Phone: +358-(0)2-237 9928       YO-Kyla 19 A 11
 -IRC: RFXn                       FIN-20540  TURKU
 -Talk: RFXn@delenn.yok.utu.fi    Finland

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 13:33:35 +2
From: "RFXn" <mlaakso@utu.fi>
Subject: Re: Winded

On 27 Aug 97 at 10:09, Joseph R. Dietrich wrote:

> There is a video called "Deadly Weapons" which deals with this
> issue. In it, the owner of a body armor company lets himself get
> shot with a "assault-style" weapon (an SKS, I think) at a range of
> about 1 meter. He stuffed a phone book beneath the vest to provide
> some protection from brusing, but nothing else. The shot made him
> flinch, but didn't knock him over, or even come close to it.

	Better load that SKS with softnose rounds; a full-metal jacket rifle 
round punches through almost any kevlar vest at 100 meters, let alone 
1 meter! More likely, the rifle used was either a .22 look-alike, or 
fired underpowered, handloaded rounds. The video is supposed to 
_sell_ body armor, remember. :)

	IMO, the show-off pictorials, videos and what have you of stupid 
people who really want to test their body armor by having somebody 
shoot at them with a handgun/rifle/shotgun/rocket launcher are so 
much BS as any gun hobbyist (versus firepower ethusiast) can tell 
you.

	But, it is true that it'd take something like a 20mm Oerlikon 
AA-cannon to knock a person down by kinetic energy alone - but with 
the energies involved the person would look pretty much like instant 
haggis whather he was wearing a bathrobe, a kevlar vest or a TL14 
battledress.

/RFXn     mlaakso@utu.fi        aka. Matti Laakso
 -Phone: +358-(0)2-237 9928       YO-Kyla 19 A 11
 -IRC: RFXn                       FIN-20540  TURKU
 -Talk: RFXn@delenn.yok.utu.fi    Finland

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 13:38:47 +2
From: "RFXn" <mlaakso@utu.fi>
Subject: RE: Blowthrough

On 27 Aug 97 at 19:05, Glenn Hoppe wrote:

> On 1997-08-26 20:22, Eris Reddoch <eris@pen.net> posted the
> following:
> 
> >>It doesn't apply to battleaxi.
> >
> >First, beerski and now battleaxi, we're creating our own vocabulary here.
> >;->
> 
> I thought it was battleaxen...

What's that, battleaxent? ;)

/RFXn     mlaakso@utu.fi        aka. Matti Laakso
 -Phone: +358-(0)2-237 9928       YO-Kyla 19 A 11
 -IRC: RFXn                       FIN-20540  TURKU
 -Talk: RFXn@delenn.yok.utu.fi    Finland

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 13:55:16 +2
From: "RFXn" <mlaakso@utu.fi>
Subject: Re: Boredom and homicidal insanity in Traveller

On 28 Aug 97 at 5:17, CardSharks@aol.com wrote:

> T4.1 makes a point of avoiding specific reference to alcohol (and
> drugs).Doesn't this sound genteel?
> 
> At its tables, people meet and enjoy light music or video,
> conversation, and meals. 

	I'm sure this will make the guardians of public morality very happy. 
However, I do have hard time imagining a bunch of hardcore belters 
who come to startown after 3 months of deep-space work to enjoy light 
music and conversation. Most likely, they will be looking for sex, 
alcohol, tobacco, sex, drugs, and maybe some sex. See how the 
old-time sailors behaved when given a shore leave after sailing from 
India to England.

	OTOH, I can understand things like that do not need to be explicitly 
described in the rulebook since most gaming groups will come up with 
them anyway. :) 

	But, it would be good to have some game rules for effects of
alocohol/drugs. GURPS Compendium II gives something like 4 pages for
this, with the best thing being the rules are excruciatingly
realistic (eg. it is possible for a drunk enough PC to die of
alcohol poisoning or suffocate in his own vomit etc.). Tasteless as 
this may be, this might even show a lesson or two to some people (the 
lesson being alcohol and other drugs are to be used responsibly or 
not at all). 


/RFXn     mlaakso@utu.fi        aka. Matti Laakso
 -Phone: +358-(0)2-237 9928       YO-Kyla 19 A 11
 -IRC: RFXn                       FIN-20540  TURKU
 -Talk: RFXn@delenn.yok.utu.fi    Finland

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1755
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Thursday, August 28 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1756



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: quien es mas macho:  Fifth Element o Event Horizon?
Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations
Re: Career paths
Re: Kinetic Energy vs. Momentum
Heplar Fuel Consumption
Re: winded
Re: Winded
re: winded
Re: Winded
Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations
Re: thermoelectric coolers
Re:  Vargr & Aslan (was Re: Blowthrough)
Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)
Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 00:50:20 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: quien es mas macho:  Fifth Element o Event Horizon?

In mail you write:

> This question doesn't have anything to do with The Fifth Element (which
> I liked, by the way, just as I like French science fiction comic books),
> but relates to Traveller.  In Event Horizon, the eponymous ship is in
> free fall around Neptune, but is also in the planet's atmosphere.  Is
> that possible? 

If it's inside the planet's atmosphere (not counting near vacuum parts
like the ionosphere) then the only way it can be in "free fall" is if
it's dropping towards the center. It *can't* be orbiting, because
orbital velocity is around mach 100 for Neptune, and the shock wave
drag would slow it down fast if it didn't burn it up.

It could be *floating* in the atmosphere, but then you wouldn't be in
free fall (and you wouldn't be seeing stars either). You'd be really
deep in the atmosphere though, and the pressure would be rather high.
(what pressure does it take to make methane as dense as water? And I
bet the ship is denser than water...)

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 14:47:44 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations

SemoFetus@aol.com writes:

>Especially since, when you really think about it, not that many ship designs
>would have fuel purification.  Who designs your average trader and says:
>"Let's give up valuable cargo space and replace it with fuel purification
>machinery to up prices even more as it will take about 6-24 hours for my crew
>to refuel when they could do it in under an hour at the local starport!"

That actually depends on the cost of refined fuel. If it costs more than about
Cr290/T it becomes cheaper for even a 200T freighter to have a fuel purifier
plant installed. The money saved in fuel bills will outweigh the revenue
gained from the freight (speculative trade is another matter, but the same
principle apply. If the average profit made on a T of goods is less than 
~Cr290 then it becomes cheaper to have an onboard fuel purifier plant. As
for the time element, if the ship has to spend more than a few hours on the
ground disembarking and embarking passengers and freight, then it might as
well use the time in refining fuel, right (and if it is a free trader, it
usually spends about a week in port).

Anyway, I did a few back-of-the-envelope calculations about deep space fuel
depots yesterday. I hope you will find them useful:

The cost of transporting fuel to a point jump-1 away will depend on the size
of the tanker; the larger the tanker, the cheaper it becomes _provided_ you
sell it all. My calculations were based on a QSDS1.5 design of a 5000 T
tanker. I use round numbers because I'm not sure what changes, if any, FF&S2
introduces, nor am I sure that my version of QSDS1.5 is entirely bug-free.

You can design a nice 5000 T jump-1 tanker with 3600 T of fuel tankage in 
addition to the 500 T it needs to make one jump for  about 1,000 MCr. If
you assume that it can make 35 jumps per year, the operating expenses runs
to roughly 65 MCr/year including bank payments and a reasonable profit on
the owners original investment. It can deliver 35*3600*0.5= 54,250 tons of 
fuel per year (35 jumps, half of them out and half of then back again; 3600
T because it has to use 500 T of the 4100 it took out to get back again).
This coems to just under Cr1200 per ton in transport costs (Note, however,
that the design includes a fuel purifier, so the tanker can buy unrefined
and deliver refined fuel). 

The final cost of fuel is therefore Cr1300/T at a minimum. This is if there
are no further overheads. If there is a manned station at the fuel depot,
you need to add the cost of running the station to the fuel cost. However,
here you run into the problem that if you set your prices too high, it
becomes cheaper for a starship to carry an extra load of fuel in a
collapsible fuel tank:

Take a 5000 T freighter. It costs exactly the same as a 5000 T tanker (fuel
tankage and cargo space cost the same). It can carry 3600 T of cargo.
Having to pay an additional Cr1200/T for half of its fuel (the fuel bought
at the deep space station) increases yearly operating expenses by roughly
MCr10. So it carries 63,000 T of freight per year at the cost of MCr75,
which comes to Cr1200 per ton. If, instead, it routinely carries the fuel
it needs for a second jump in a collapsible fuel tank then it carries only
3100*35*0.5=54,250 T of freight per year at an operating expense of MCr65,
which again comes to roughly Cr1200 per T. So if it has to pay more than
Cr1300 per T of fuel at the deep space station, it becomes cheaper to carry
the fuel itself.

Now, this is for a 5000 T freighter. Smaller ships have higher freight and
passenger charges because the cost and operation expenses are more or less
proportional to the size of the ship (and where they are'nt, they are higher
the smaller the ship is) but the percentage of the ship that is used for 
cargo and passenger is larger the larger the ship. So a 200 T ship would 
have to charge more per T for freight in order to break even. So if a deep 
space station caters to small ships, then they propably can make a profit on 
selling fuel at, say, Cr1500/T.

The question is whether there would be any small ships to cater to. Remember 
that a jump-2 ship can carry freight and passengers across a two-parsec 
distance in half the time and at something more than half the charge, so a 
jump-1 ship cannot compete against jump-2 rivals across such a gap. Jump-1 
ships are competetive, but only if the make a profit on each jump it makes. 
With intermediate stops at a deep space station jump-1 ships only make a 
profit on every second jump.

So, all in all, a deep space fuel station is unlikely to be economically
feasible. This only applies if the fuel has to be carried by jump ships,
of course. If you have a local source of supply you can make a very nice
profit. But you still have a max on the price you can charge on the fuel.



      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8
 

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 14:51:55 +0100
From: Stewart Eyres <spe@astro.keele.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Career paths

>The most current information I have to hand here at the Nottingham
>Business School is that individuals graduating now or in the next few
>years are widely expected to have an average of 7 (seven) different
>"career positions" before they retire. Additionally, many commentators
>see the increasing dependence on intellectual rather than physical
>skills pushing up the average age or retirement to 75-80, shudder.

Yes, but is that 7 positions in business?  ie. in one Traveller
career?  Also, how many of those moves occur before age 34 yrs (most I
suspect, hence the relevancy to Trav).  More useful, if anyone has the
statistics, is the degree of movement at different times in history.
Is the current mobility of the workforce high or average (I think most
people approaching or past retirement would consider it much more
mobile than say 20-30 years ago)?  In other words, what are the
bench-marks and limits on career-mobility?  I think the Traveller rule
of one-career before adventuring is straight forward, and could be
said to reflect the essential stability needed to maintain an
interstellar state.  Perhaps if you specified your character as only
ever worked on one world, in careers which could be moved between
easily, then you could do it.  But then, the character wouldn't have
been a "Traveller", as they have been bound to one world.  I think the
basic premise of the basic Traveller careers was to provide PCs who
had the opportunity and skills to have experienced working on an
interstellar setting.  Still, it would be nice to know were it sits on
the scale of career mobility - perhaps this is a basic variable of
psychohistory...

The Imperial culture has also been influenced by (1) Vilani, with
their life-long castes, and (2) the Solomani military-based culture
with an emphasis on service (even if you are lining your own pockets
as you go...). The embryonic Third Imperium would presumably emphasise
the positive aspects of their predecessors.

Stewart Eyres <spe@astro.keele.ac.uk>

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 09:01:42 -0500
From: yikes@evansville.net (Joseph R. Dietrich)
Subject: Re: Kinetic Energy vs. Momentum

>On Wed, 27 Aug 1997 23:26:08 -0400 (EDT), John Macpherson wrote:

>>       Both of you are a little off.  First of all, slugs have a lot of
>> kinetic energy, but not a lot of momentum -- Joseph had it reversed.
>> While James is right in saying that momentum is related to kinetic
>> energy, they are not as closely related as he seems to think.

You are right, I had it reversed.

>> An example:
>>       A bullet that masses 50g and has a velocity of 1000m/s
>> (it's a big, high velocity bullet)

Hmm. A 765 grain bullet. That is a *huge* bullet. :)

>Actually, what are the units for momentum?  Metre-grams per second?
>KE is measured in Joules.  What is momentum measured in (I was
>probably asleep in class when they mentioned that "mass*velocity"
>thing)?

It's kg*m/s.

>>  Better load that SKS with softnose rounds; a full-metal jacket rifle
>>round punches through almost any kevlar vest at 100 meters, let alone
>>1 meter! More likely, the rifle used was either a .22 look-alike, or
>>fired underpowered, handloaded rounds. The video is supposed to
>>_sell_ body armor, remember. :)

Hmm. I don't think this was a sales video. It was more of an NRA guy trying
to dispel myths about firearms. The body armor part was a really small
segment of the video overall. (I think the person(s) who wrote FFS1 must
have seen this video, because the segment on "keyholing" was very
familiar). It *could* have been a cleverly disguised ad, though ... ;)

Anyway, another thing to consider is that there are other ways for a bullet
to expend its energy rather than just transferring it to the target as
movement. Bullets deform. It takes energy to do that. In the case of hard
target, they tend to ricochet (not delivering their full energy) or
splatter (on a direct hit), assuming they don't penetrate. Then there is
the shock-absorbing nature of the armor itself (and human tissue). Padding
in the kevlar (or whatever you are using) acts like a spring, absorbing
energy and rebounding.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 11:10:25 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Macpherson <john35@wharton.upenn.edu>
Subject: Heplar Fuel Consumption

Hi all,
	Intrigued by the notion that something as important as heplar 
fuel consumption could have been screwed up in the latest edition of 
FF&S, I thought I'd do some calculations to check.

	FF&S1 says that heplar consumes .25m^3 lhyd per MW per hour.  It 
also says that heplar produces 20 tonnes of thrust per MW of power. That 
comes out to .25m^3/hr/20 tonnes=.0125 m^3/hr/tonne.

	FF&S2 says that heplar consumes .00125 m^3/hr/kN thrust.  Let's 
put these in the same units.  For our purposes, there are 10kN in a 
tonne, so .00125m^3/hr/kN = .0125m^3/hr/tonne.

	Exactly the same!  Hallelujah!

[Notice the use of correct units after our friendly neighborhood social 
scientist was shown up by a _real_ scientist :-) ]

- -JM

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 10:56:01 -0400
From: Mark Urbin <eclipse@ultranet.com>
Subject: Re: winded

shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) writes:
>>    It looks like we are in agreement here.  The shot end is just about the
>> same  amount of 'kick'.  Rember that it's also concentrated on a smaller
>> surface area than the butt of the shotgun.
>Excuse me? That's an *awfully* tight pattern your shotgun has! :-)

   Well, if you shoot them at close range, the pattern does stay nice and
tight. :-).  How does that old saw go, "The best choke is the target's
bellybutton."  Besides, my warrior characters have always preferred loading
shotguns with a mix of heavy shot & slug shells. :-)


- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
eclipse@ultranet.com http://www.ultranet.com/~eclipse/ #insert <disclaimer.h>
      Smith&Wesson -- The Ultimate "Point & Click" User interface.
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
- -

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 10:49:59 -0400
From: Mark Urbin <eclipse@ultranet.com>
Subject: Re: Winded

David Smart <dsmart@flash.net> wrote:
>Mark Urbin wrote:
[snip] 
>I take it, then, from this and the posts following the above that the
>"Thud gun" should be considered useless?

   Well, no.  The Thud gun works differently.  It delivers a low velocity,
heavy, and wide projectile.  It's not designed to penatrate, just deliver
kenitic engergy efficently to the target.

   The projectile is much slower, bigger, and heavier than a bullet.  
By going slow, and by being big, the thud gun projecticle ignores the
'blowthrough' rule that effects much faster, smaller rounds.

   
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
eclipse@ultranet.com http://www.ultranet.com/~eclipse/ #insert <disclaimer.h>
It was a typical net.exercise -- a screaming mob pounding on a greasy spot on 
the pavement, where used to lie the carcass of a dead horse.
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
- --

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 10:59:29 -0400
From: Mark Urbin <eclipse@ultranet.com>
Subject: re: winded

Eris wrote:
>Ah, yep. We are in agreement on the general effect.  
>I'm just pointing out that a large bore shotgun has enough of a kick to get
>your attention.  It's *not* at all like firing a light rifle.

Big time agreement here.  I pointed this out in TNE playtesting with one of
my players.  He was a big boy in a CBE suit.  I took some 20 point NPCs, &
gave 'em shotguns & SMGs.  I made full use of blunt trauma rules and
knockdown rules.

He got the point.


- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
eclipse@ultranet.com http://www.ultranet.com/~eclipse/ #insert <disclaimer.h>
It was a typical net.exercise -- a screaming mob pounding on a greasy spot on 
the pavement, where used to lie the carcass of a dead horse.
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
- --

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 11:19:41 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Macpherson <john35@wharton.upenn.edu>
Subject: Re: Winded

 
jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay) said:
 > > 	This basic physics note has been brought to you by your friendly 
> > neighborhood social scientist. :-)
> 
> Thanks, "friendly neighbourhood social scientist"!  :)
> 
> Actually, what are the units for momentum?  Metre-grams per second?
> KE is measured in Joules.  What is momentum measured in (I was
> probably asleep in class when they mentioned that "mass*velocity"
> thing)?

	Well, as Stewart Eyres (a _real_ scientist) reminded us, the 
units are Newton*seconds.  I admit that I couldn't remember the name for 
kg*m/sec so left it off.  Since Newtons are a measure of force (kg*m/sec^2) 
it's obvious that kg*m/sec is a Newton*sec.
	Now, does anyone have any _economics_ questions? :-)
 
- -JM

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 11:30:03 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Macpherson <john35@wharton.upenn.edu>
Subject: Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations

tconnor@pop3.utoledo.edu (Tim Connors) said:
> >
> >>However, FF&S2 HEPlaR has horrible fuel efficiency
> >>compared to the old FF&S...  Its tough.
>
>         Looks like they missed by about 40%.
> 
>         For a 932 Td hull, I figured 81.55 kl of LHyd per G-turn (1/2 hour)
> from FF&S2.

	You made a mistake somewhere here.  932 Td hull with an average 
density of 10 tonnes/Td is 9320 tonnes requiring 93200 kN thrust.

	93200*.00125m^3/hr/kN = 116.5m^3/hr.  

	For a half-hour (turn) 116.5/2=58.25 m^3/hr

>         For a 900 Td Hull from FF&S, I figured 56.25 kl of LHyd per G-turn.
	This appears correct.

- -JM

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 09:06:32 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: Re: thermoelectric coolers

On Wed, 27 Aug 1997, Thomas Walter Trelenberg wrote:

> 'Twas written:
> 
> *********************************
> There are thermo-electric units that use electricity *directly* to pump
> heat from one side to the other. Staged, they could do the job nicely,
> but they do use a *lot* more power.
> *********************************
> 
> These are really neat....I found out about them in my teens and have
> been playing with them ever since.  They are cheap (about $18 for about
> a one ince square unit that will freeze a drop of water placed on it (if
> properly heat sunk) at about 18V, 4A.  Actually, the drop of water would
> freeze in Nevada, here in Florida the humidity is so high that so much
> of a heat load gets put on the device that the drop never freezes...it
> does get cold though.)

Is this a 'Peltier Junction' device? If so Shreve Systems
(www.shrevesystems.com) sells them:

"Peltier Junction with Heat Sink For all you tech-heads here's the
original Peltier Junction and heat sink for the PowerPC 601+ processor. A
Peltier Junction is also known as a thermo-electric cooler. Through the
miracle of work-a-day physics it uses electric current to make itself at
least 200 to 400 cooler than the ambient air temperature; often cold
enough to freeze water. Cool your processor or be the life of Physics 101.
Great for Peltier experiments! 

Only $19.00"

Their phone number is 1-800-227-3971

The Peltier Junction is sold on the Tech Stuff page.

BTW they're a good place for Mac parts cheep!

Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 09:34:43 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re:  Vargr & Aslan (was Re: Blowthrough)

At 11:27 PM 8/27/97 -0800, you wrote:
>Eris Reddoch wrote
>
>>  If Vargr average 70% of humans in
>> mass then is it *possible* their average STR and/or EDU should be     >
closer to 5 than 7?
>
>I assume you meant STR & END not STR and EDU.
>
>Yes it is possible.  However wolves are, pound for pound, stronger than
>humans so Vargr could be as well. END is more subjective than STR is and
>before we say that Vargr have a lower END we need to define END.

It seems that Vargr are described in Cogs and Dogs as being faster than
humans, but quicker to tire.. different kind of END..  For TACS, Vargr have
some advantages when it comes to sprinting, but need longer to recover.

>> And if the Aslan average 150% human average (or more) then is it
>> possible they should *average* 10+?  Just more grist for the mill...;->
>
>Yes it is possible.  I think that TNE and MT were right to give Aslan
>STR +2 and END +2 rather than the +1 to each which CT did.  Plus 1 to
>Strength means that Aslan average less than 1 standard deviation
>stronger. I hope that T4 gives them +2 to STR and END as well.

Aslan are supposed to be bigger and stronger than us mere monkeys, so I
support this idea.

>However I should note that large bonuses to stats will make the Aslan
>objectively superior _for_a_Munchkin_player_ than humans are.  It might
>be better to require minimum stats as well as give bonuses.
>
>As an example Aslan might require a starting STR of 6+ and then gain a
>+2 to whatever their STR was.

I don't see where this is a good idea.. an aslan will start out with a STR
from 4-14, averging 9.  There must be Aslan wimps out there!  I'd find it a
challenge to play a low-STR Aslan, perhaps he's left Aslan society for
human space simply because he never could win duels!

- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 09:28:55 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)

At 09:37 PM 8/27/97 GMT, James W. Lindsay wrote:

Thanks for the commentary.  As a general note, I do intend to use more
examples in the next version.  For the purposes of the TML post, I left
most of them out.

On to the specifics.

>> 2 Action Phase:  Starting with the combatant with the lowest AP total, all 
>                                                        ^^^^^^

>Might I suggest an alternative that can be used, perhaps, as an
>optional rule:
>
>The combatants are allowed to expend _up_to_half_ their APs beginning
>with the combatant with the HIGHEST AP total (they do not have to
>expend any APs if they so choose).  Once the last combatant has had a
>chance to expend APs (up to half of their total), the order of play
>reverses.  Combatants now expend their remaining APs, beginning with
>the individual with the LOWEST AP total.  This allows combatants with
>superior AP totals to act first if they so choose, while still
>allowing them to react to APs spent by their slower opponents.

I tried something similar in the beginning, it bogged down when you had PCs
with 20 APs using them all on a single shot task, freezing out slower
characters.  This forces the slower PCs to commit first.  Of course, if you
have a combatant with 10 or fewer APs, he should be spending a great deal
of time under cover, hoarding his APs for reaction shots.

>> Airlocks take 15 turns to completely cycle if there is a pressure
difference.
>
>Might I suggest "turns=2x UWP atmosphere difference" (taken from SOM).
>Example, going from ATM=7 to total vacuum would take 2x7 or 14 combat
>turns.

I didn't remember that.. have to get that book again.  Consider it changed.

>> Whenever two or more combatants come into to conflict, or any situation
>> where it is important to determine who moves first, use the following task:
>
>I am a bit confused here.  Is this procedure only necessary if two
>combatants have identical AP totals, or simply if two characters wish
>to-- as an example-- open the same iris valve during the same combat
>turn?  It seems to be in conflict with Section II.

Whenever two or more combatants wish to do something that will affect the
other combatants.  Example:  It's A's turn, and he declares that he's going
to move down the hall.  B announces she's going to shot at A.  C announces
that he's going to try and tackle B before she can shoot.  All three
players have to roll the Initative task.  Also, not that all those declared
actions have been committed.. If B moves first, and hits A, then C is still
committed to the grapple.

I'll also make more explicit that *any combatant* with avalible AP can
attempt an Intiative task at any point.  This is why you hoard the things!

<On Melee>

>I'd add the remark that an object is usually necessary to block or
>parry a melee attack.  There should also be some mention of risk to
>the blocker to whatever appendage s/he uses to deflect the incoming
>attack if s/he does not have an object to block with.  I know another
>task roll would only complicate things but many RPGs allow characters
>to block attacks all day long without any detrimental effects :)

Good point, I've done that in a HarnMaster game.. the infamous "Lefty"
Mikal...

Idealy, the opposed tasks in the system should be rolled at the same time,
then the results compared.  I have tried to keep the number of rolls
necessary down, simply because I prefer a fast system.

>> The target may also dodge:
>
>Assuming the defender was wise enough to retain enough APs to, in
>fact, dodge or block the attack :)

The number of times that my playtesters had to stand there and suck up
damage....  <grin>

>> Range and Aiming AP:

>You might want to include the optional EA rule regarding absolute
>maximum range of certain weapons (ie: two range bands beyond the Aimed
>Fire Range).  It is, after all, a combat-related rule designed to
>mimic the limitations of most weaponry and should be included in any
>set of potential combat rules.

How about:  "The maximum range for any firearm is two range bands beyond
the printed effective range.  Aimed fire beyond that range is not possible
under any circumstance.  Example:  A pistol with an effective range of Very
Short would have a max range of Medium."

>> Autofire:

>This will mean rolling an awful lot of dice (an inherent problem when
>using autofire weapons and 6-second combat turns)!
>
>Might I suggest the following: if 10 rounds are fired into an area,
>roll 10d6-- with each '6' result indicating a hit by a single
>projectile. If 11-20 rounds are fired, roll 10d6-- with each '6'
>result indicating a hit by two projectiles.  If 21-30 rounds are
>fired, roll 10d6-- with each '6' result indicating a hit by three
>projectiles.  Etc.  Or perhaps a +DM to hit and a damage multiplier
>like in 3G3.

This is one of the trickier areas.. I've had a number of suggestions on how
to handle supressive fire.  I'll give yours a shot.  (no pun intended.)

>> Shotguns and Flechettes.

>Yikes!  Full auto shotguns will require thousands if dice! :P
>
>Shotguns have always been a pain to represent accurately in any RPG.
>Might I suggest simply using a +DM and a damage multiplier and be done
>with it :)

For full auto, maybe.  Shotguns are a very useful weapon, so I'm more
inclined to make sure that their unique abilities are modeled correctly.
For the most part, I've found that shotguns get used at ranges that don't
require the multishot rules.

>Also, unless an opponent is wearing completely sealed armour, s/he
>*will* take hits to the face, neck, and hands.  An individual wearing
>battledress with his or her helmet and/or gloves removed should not be
>considered invulnerable due to his or her superior hard armour rating.

I'm working up hit location rules.  

>> V. Injuries and Effects

>> Increased Damage.
>> Any to hit roll made by 9 or more results in damage being tripled after
>> penetration.
>
>Why '9' and not '10'?  '10' Just seems more natural and easier to
>remember.

That's from the T4 rules.  Anybody else want the change to triple damage
coming on a to-hit roll made by ten?

Somebody sent me mail (I can't remember who, and i've deleted it, sorry)
complaining that it's too hard to get an increased damage hit.  That's what
aiming is for.  In one playtest, my wife's character (STR-6 Pistol-1 17AP)
was in a concealed position and fired one shot at a target at Very Short
range.  She spent 4AP for the action, plus *10* for aiming, raising her
target number from seven to seventeen!  On a 2D6 task, it was easy to get a
triple damage result.  (She then proceeded to roll the pistol's 3D6 damage,
and got a natural 18.  This became known as the "penguin puree" shot..)

>> Blowthrough.
>> 
>> The maximum damage done by melee weapons, slug throwers, laser, and
>> fragments is based on the mass of the target:

>I'd limit this to simply slug throwers.  Any swung melee weapon that
>comes to a stop inside a target effectively transfers all of its
>energy to that target.  Projectiles fired from firearms often do not
>(and those that do are generally low-powered to begin with).

First of all, remove melee weapons from that list.  Secondly, If I take
lasers out, it creates a "super-class" of weapon that isn't subject to the
rules.

>Lasers superheat flesh, causing surface explosions due to the rapidly
>expanding water in the tissue.  The vapourized water and flesh also
>absorb much of the energy of the laser beam, leaving little energy
>left to burn a hole out the back of the victim.  In essence, most
>lasers would probably drop all of their energy into the target and
>would not be subjected to the Blowthrough rule (unless he was a
>wabbit).

Rabbits are immune to lasers.  Don't ask.  

You make a good point, but my research seems to indicate that the steam
around the wound will interfere with the beam itself.  I understand this is
a common problem in industrial applications of laser cutting.

>> Plasma/Fusion weapons and explosions are exempt from the Blowthrough rule.

>I'm probably the only one that thinks plasma weapons *should* use the
>blowthrough rule.  Plasma bolts are high velocity projectiles.  The
>heat they possess would not affect the target to any great degree due
>to the amount of time the bolt actually remains inside the target.
>The resulting "plasma splash" (the "explosive" damage) and "heat beam"
>(half the "explosive" damage) would be cumulative, however, since the
>suit is now breached and will not protect the individual from the
>intense heat.

I left plasma weapons off simply because they do damage in several
different ways.  As you say, they are highly kinetic, very hot, and splash.
 This leads me to bleive that they will do great amounts of hurt even as
the pass through a body.

>> Applying Damage.

>A note should be included that all AP penalties are temporary,
>one-time losses (ie: they are not used to recalculate a character's AP
>total-- that's what DEX and INT reduction is for).

I'll add "for the duration of the turn that the wound was recieved" to the
discription, along with a note that AP losses are cumlative inside the turn.

>> Telescopic Sights.

>True or false... should telescopic sights only be beneficial versus
>stationary or slow moving targets?  Wouldn't an evading target move
>outside the sighting radius of the scope, making it awkward to keep
>the sights fixed on the target?

Well, *I* could hit moving targets..  :)   Since sights are pretty useless
at close ranges (it's more effceient to just spend AP on aiming), most
t-sights will be at ranges where the apparnt motion of the target will be
fairly slow.

Right now, the draft idea for the moving target penality is a -1 DM for
each meter moved by the target in the current turn.  I'm also adding
Evasive to the movement options, this makes any ranged attempt to hit you
one level more difficult, at a cost of x2 AP cost.  You can't sprint and be
evasive at the same time!

>A task (complete with AP expenditure) for reorientating one's self
>after becoming disorientated in zero gravity should be included as
>well.  Until such a task is successful, further AP expenditures should
>only be allowed for additional reorientation attempts.

Another good idea.

You want credit as a developer?

- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 13:07:33 -0400 (EDT)
From: SemoFetus@aol.com
Subject: Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations

>That's an error, unfortunately; the fuel efficiency was intended to stay
>exactly the same.

So, officially fuel efficiency should equal FF&S?

Cool.

Semo

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1756
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Thursday, August 28 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1757



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations
Re: Winded
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1741
Re: FF&S2
Sanity
Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations
Re: Task Resolution
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1754
KE
Re: thermoelectric coolers
Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)
Re: Winded
Re: Task Resolution
Re: Task Resolution
re: winded
Re: Winded
Re: Winded
about WebRing

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 13:24:03 -0400 (EDT)
From: SemoFetus@aol.com
Subject: Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations

>Still, it's not like you have to get the ships up to huge velocities.
>Consider, if a ship jumps in and is 100,000 km away, at 30 km/sec, it
>takes less than an hour to get to you. So the tug just needs to boost
>the ship up to that speed, then slow it down again when it gets close.
>(Note, the tugs will be aiming the ships to "just miss" the base. That
>way, if there's a problem and they can't brake it in time, it'll just
>sail on past, and another tug can rescue the ship and tug.

I have a sort of mental block in my understanding of acceleration and
velocity and such.  Its getting better, but its something I have trouble
"visualizing".  Things make a little more sense now, so, everything's a
little better and fuel efficiency is better too :)

>For that matter, if a ship just wants to refuel and not "visit" (hey,
>even a station like yours is a break from staring at your own ship's
>bulkheads) then you could just let it sit and have the tug boost out a
>"fuel bladder" (cheap, collapsible tank). That'll use a lot less fuel
>than dragging in the ship and then dragging it back out. /Instead of
>moving the mass of the ship one way and the ship plus fuel the other,
>you're moving a tank plus fuel one way and an empty tank the other way.

An aspect that I hadn't really thought of...  This is neat.

>Duh! I just realized that given that this is a deep space hex, you
>don't *need* a tank! At the temps that far away from a star, you can
>store hydrogen as a *solid*. So you just cover it with a flexible
>plastic "bubble" and push it to wherever. Then a small heater will
>liquefy the stuff as fast as you can pump it. The bubble is just to
>keep the liquid from evaporating or wandering away.

Yet another aspect I hadn't thought of, and I probably wouldn't have.  Very
cool! :)

Thanks for the help! :)

Semo

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 97 18:28 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: Winded

In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.16.19970826054449.326724fa@mail.hooked.net>

Douglas,

> I'm still trying to find a good rule for knock-down for v2.2.. dmage
> exceeds DEX?  END?  I want to avoid another task roll at that point.

Damage > lowest physical stat = knock down.
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 13:42:06 -0400 (EDT)
From: SemoFetus@aol.com
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1741

>My "gut feel" for this would be:  If you find a rogue planet
>(i.e., rock or rock/ice ball of size 1 or better), costs to
>construct a deep station on it would be twice the normal costs
>for a starport of equivalent capabilities. (i.e., to build a
>(much of post snipped)

In your message you mention close-structures.  What, exactly, is a close
structure?

I do not have the Pocket Empires book.  What is an RU (I would assume it
means Resource Unit?) "worth"?

Thanks,
Semo

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 13:36:01 -0400 (EDT)
From: SemoFetus@aol.com
Subject: Re: FF&S2

I scream:
>> 1.)  Table 212: Food Storage.  Does the volume include the amount of
>> food, or is it in addition to the amount of food?

You scream:
>I think Craig Berry's answer was right on the money, the volume listed
>includes the stored food.  However this is not very apparent

That's pretty much what I figured.  So, just to clarify:  If I have 1m3 of
food and 1.2m3 of food storage, the whole thing takes up only 1.2m3 on my
Widget/Raft?

Chris Cox said:
>As both Doug and Craig said, neither workstations or crewstation require
>seats.  Seats are included in the figures for workstations and crewstations.

>I think that there will need to be a clarification added to Errata list
about
>this.

Okay.  So my six "seat" Widget/Raft will in fact have only five seats and a
crewstation assuming one maneuver crewsophont?

Chris also said:
>On Page 75 it says " The electronics crew operates on-board electronic
>systems: sensors, communicators, and computers", so I would geuss that the
>(number of installed electronic systems) would be the total number of
>sensors, communicators, and computers, but wouldn't include controls,
>avionics and such.

Okay.  Cool.  Again, that's what I figured, but I wanted to be safe.

Thanks alot for the help,

Semo

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 13:38:45 -0400
From: "Glenn Crawford" <glennc@nelvana.com>
Subject: Sanity

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 15:22:21 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mark Ayers <mark@bbic.com>
Subject: Re: Boredom and homicidal insanity in Traveller

The T4 sanity/morale system is in place. I call it the referee. A player
drawn to excessive violence will eventually be roleplaying a body bag or
from a deep space maximum security prison facility. As for boredom it's the
referee's role to stop either real world or game world boredom. [unles,s of
course, game world boredom is the build-up to some great mindless violence.

But here you are invoking GM fiat. I mean by this a system to determine
MENTAL damage. Every game has rules for PHYSICAL damage. Traveller needs the
mental stuff. LIke Generals, games designers dismiss mental casualties as
not significant. There is an issue of DGP's Traveller's Digest that dealt
with it, I would like something further to happen with that. Players will
say "oh, my character only likes to read tech manuals and never takes leave
and can only tolerate bland, really cheap food" in order to avoid spending
any money. Mental disease is insidious. 

Players have no trouble taking penalties for physical damage because there
are rules to cover it. They would probably feel the same if mental damage
was covered too. This way, GMs do not feel like they have to keep reminding
players to not behave sociopathically

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 13:53:17 -0400 (EDT)
From: SemoFetus@aol.com
Subject: Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations

>That actually depends on the cost of refined fuel. If it costs more than
about
>Cr290/T it becomes cheaper for even a 200T freighter to have a fuel purifier
>plant installed. The money saved in fuel bills will outweigh the revenue
>gained from the freight (speculative trade is another matter, but the same
>principle apply. If the average profit made on a T of goods is less than 
>~Cr290 then it becomes cheaper to have an onboard fuel purifier plant. As
>for the time element, if the ship has to spend more than a few hours on the
>ground disembarking and embarking passengers and freight, then it might as
>well use the time in refining fuel, right (and if it is a free trader, it
>usually spends about a week in port).

Point well taken.  I will consider this in future trade ship designs.

>Anyway, I did a few back-of-the-envelope calculations about deep space fuel
>depots yesterday. I hope you will find them useful:

I'm sure I will.  Thank you very much.

>So, all in all, a deep space fuel station is unlikely to be economically
>feasible. This only applies if the fuel has to be carried by jump ships,
>of course. If you have a local source of supply you can make a very nice
>profit. But you still have a max on the price you can charge on the fuel.

Planning on using iceteroids.  Large ones tendered in in big ships, and
little ones brought in by belters and such.  So the supply will be more or
less local.

Semo

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 10:48:54 -0700
From: Scott Ellsworth <Scott_Ellsworth@alumni.hmc.edu>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

At 02:34 AM 8/28/97 +0000, you wrote:
>Bill Rutherford wrote:
>
>> If one of you has retained the results (Kenneth - YOU must've!) would you
>> mind reposting them?
>
>No, sorry Bill.  I didn't keep it, but at last count there were some 85
>TML list members who said that they thought there was a problem with the
>T4 task system.
>
>That problem was that a Level-4 medic could have a lower chance of
>success than a level-1 medic, if the novice's stat was high enough.

I suspect we should all just agree to disagree on this one.

As I see it, there are roughly three kinds of game out there, and they are
all viable.

1.  Old Age and Treachery Will Always Beat Youth and Genius:

Stats are not as important as skills, and most people do not have stats
that change a lot.  The stats will contribute, but the primary
determination of how well you do something is skill.  The longer you have
done something, the better you are, so older characters are better than
younger ones by a fair amount.

A classic example of this is the old martial artist, who may have lost some
strength and so on, but who can still whip the tar out of the trained young
apprentice.  Yep, it is a cliche, but it is one that matches many people's
models of how it should work.

In this type of world, a trained professional is almost never going to be
beaten by a new trainee, unless the stat difference is incredible.
Traveller terms - assume CT skill levels in which a 3 was considered damn
good, and a 5 was considered exceptional.  Someone with a rolled 12 is
something like 2.5 standard deviations above the norm, and is in the top 1%
or so of the race.  Match him with a skill 1 against a pro with a skill
three and an average stat, and it is arguable who will win, even though he
is in the to 1%.

If the pro has stats that would suggest entering the field, or the trainee
is merely in the top third or so (stat 9), then it is no contest.  The
season pro wins the contest.

2.  Out of the Way, Codger:

In this system, how high your stats are is not terribly important, as this
is a world of Luke Skywalker, young farm boy, who can take his extreme
stats and near lack of skill, and turn into one of the best pilots in the
Rebellion, based on his experience nailing Whomp rats in Beggars canyon.

Space opera often runs this way, but it is a familiar experience to those
of us in software.  Ten years after getting out of school, your
technologies are out of date, and a young hot shot is going to be better
than you are.

Current T4 feels more this way to me than most, but not strongly.  Given
the high number of skills per year and the absence of a decay function, it
seems like an old character is going to be dripping with high skills.  It
is true, though, that in the typical 22-34 range that parties are in, high
stats will dominate the skill levels most people have.  

3.  The Blessed Few and the Accursed Many:

Here, stats determine your future skill level, so someone with high stats
will not start out better than everyone, but will rapidly get that way.
For example, that natural 12 stat will make them widely skilled, if they
study any int based skill at all.

This means that a character with high stats is going to be encouraged to
specialize in what higher stat is good at.  Further, if a character gets
high stats in generation, then they are a better character than one with
low stats.  Many point based systems work like this, in effect.

An alternative is that all characters advance in skill at the same rate,
but that the skill points have to de distributed according to the stats.
If you are smart, you will learn something even when digging ditches.

T4 relevance:

Which of the three system you like, and where T4 falls is a matter of
debate.  Personally, I think it overvalues stats vs. skill, and so its like
#2, but it is not nearly as strong at that as, say Amber, which has no
skills at all.  Further, the number of skills received can make skills and
stats quite competitive about age 40 or so, as you will have 33 skill
levels.  I suspect, therefore, that your opinion of T4 is determined by the
average age of the characters.  Young characters have a lot of skills at
low levels, while older characters are going to have some skill spikes.

Marc's latest changes to the task system give enough information that I am
happy.  Even if the system is not as I would make it, he describes the
issues well enough that those who think differently can fix it as they see
fit, without invalidating the published stuff.  Knowing what an average
skill is supposed to do is really a handy thing, and makes the rest of the
debate less important.

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, 28 Aug 1997 15:14:22 +0000
From: jasonj@camitel.com
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1754

Roderick Darroch wrote:

> Lt Kehaaarl: An Aslan ex-marine.  Big, bad, furry.  Quote of the week: "Amr
> reminds me of a pushok".  Apparently a pushok is a sot of flying snake with
> an anaesthetic bite...

	Umm Darroch..you forgot the best part. The Pah'Shok is vampiric :). 
You also don't realize that you have been bitten by one. Until you're 
dying of blood loss.  Mr Santayema might have a little competition as 
the leech of the spaceways ( Love the character Ross..truely :) ).  
Wait till you see what I have reserved for Sir Loreni Vilash .	
	

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 15:35:54 -0400
From: "Glenn Crawford" <glennc@nelvana.com>
Subject: KE

There seems to be a proble distinguishing between energy and work. While I
am not a physicist, I think this is the dif....

A 10  gram slug moving at 1000m/s has 5000 Joules of energy but only does 10
kg of work.
The recoil and impact is based on work, damage is based on KE. In short, the
slug can actually move 10 kg, but it can transfer, based on medium, much
much more

And then my train of thought got derailed and suffered a major chemical
spill........

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 12:43:12 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: Re: thermoelectric coolers

On Thu, 28 Aug 1997, Bruce Johnson wrote:

> miracle of work-a-day physics it uses electric current to make itself at
> least 200 to 400 cooler than the ambient air temperature; often cold
> enough to freeze water. Cool your processor or be the life of Physics 101.

Uhh  make that 20 to 40 degrees...obviously when I pasted in the text off
the web site I didn't notice that little typo (it was a proper degree
symbol on their web page, it just didn't translate well to the Unix
character set I'm using on this machine)

Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 12:45:31 PDT
From: "Charles Li" <chaslimd@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)

>Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 16:44:27 -0700
>To: traveller@NS.MPGN.COM
>From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
>Subject: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>X-Mime-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by mom.hooked.net 
id RAA07562
>Sender: owner-traveller@lists.MPGN.COM
>Reply-To: traveller@MPGN.COM
>
>The Tactical Action Combat System, version 2.1
>
>designed by Douglas E. Berry (dberry@hooked.net)
>
>I. Introduction.
>
>The TACS is a combat system for Traveller that emphasizes the
>action/reaction cycle found in real-world combat.  Using this system 
make=
>s
>the characters consider their actions carefully, and use caution and 
care
>when in deadly situations; something that, in my opinion, is sadly 
lackin=
>g
>from most RPG systems.
>
>This system is designed for Traveller 4.1.  The tasks described use the
>system developed by Marc Miller and distributed to members of the Traveller
>Mailing List.  Whenever possible, I have held as close to the published 4th
>edition rules as possible.
>
>Feedback and suggestions are always welcome, and if Marc wants it, I would
>be happy to have this system used in T4.1 for just the writing credit.
>
..................

I would recommend reverting "death"  to all three characteristics 
reduced to zero instead of the proposed definition Doug wrote for TACS.  
This is true to Traveller form AND a player wouldn't have to deal with 
keeping track of negative points (a la D&D).
>+-------------------------------------------------+
>|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
>|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
>|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
>|*************************************************|
>|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
>|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
>|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
>|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
>|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
>+-------------------------------------------------+


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 14:59:42 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Winded

At 06:28 PM 8/28/97 BST-1, you wrote:
>In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.16.19970826054449.326724fa@mail.hooked.net>
>
>Douglas,
>
>> I'm still trying to find a good rule for knock-down for v2.2.. dmage
>> exceeds DEX?  END?  I want to avoid another task roll at that point.
>
>Damage > lowest physical stat = knock down.

Works for me.. ok, add to the wounds section:

Knockdown.

If damage exceeds the combatants lowest current physical characteristic,
the combatant immediately goes prone, and loses all remaining AP for that turn.
- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 14:57:50 -0700
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

Thu, 28 Aug 1997 02:34:17 +0000, Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com>
[regarding the poll]
>No, sorry Bill.  I didn't keep it, but at last count there were some 85
>TML list members who said that they thought there was a problem with the
>T4 task system.
>
>That problem was that a Level-4 medic could have a lower chance of
>success than a level-1 medic, if the novice's stat was high enough.

No.  The poll asked if the there was _any_ problem with the system
that they thought should be changed (or in fact, if they simply
prefered another system, which was why I was, in fact, counted
among those 85).  It was _not_ "do you think stat should count
more than skill?".

There have been a number of people who have maintained this
(some in a large number of posts).  But there have been
significant posts on the other side too.

And, in fact, if you look at the gaming community at a whole,
systems where stats don't count more than skill are commmon
and accepted.  So clearly this isn't a objectively considered
a "problem".

_______________________________________________________________
DSummers@Mail.ARC.NASA.gov

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 15:10:44 -0700
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

Thu, 28 Aug 1997 09:39:48 +0100, SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>

>Please stop this *now* - from the last Great Task War we know that neither
>of you will back down and that you have opposing positions. Marc has made
>his choice on the task system - Kenneth has valid reasons for having
>problems with (with which I do sympathise) and David has long argued for
>something similar to T4 IIRC (which I can also sympathise with). However,
>T4.1 is the system we are getting, and it is a tweaked and better working
>T4 (having used it since Marc posted it I'm *reasonably* happy with it).
>
>So please don't start this again...

I agree.  And all we have to do to prevent it is to agree that
one is not going to argue call things that don't go the way
we favor a "problem" or "mistake" or "flaw" with the system
(as if there was no disagreement about it) and to not try and
claim that "everyone is on my side" when there is nothing
to back up that claim.

Posts were one says things like "I know there are people
that don't agree, but for me this doesn't seem to be the way
to go" will have no such problem.  But if people are going
to keep making posts that assume things dubious postions to
be unchallenged, then you are going to get responses (and
I did wait for a number of posts until it became clear that
there was an intention to "assume away" opposition to the
point.)

_______________________________________________________________
DSummers@Mail.ARC.NASA.gov

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 18:04:21 -0400
From: Mark Urbin <eclipse@ultranet.com>
Subject: re: winded

yikes@evansville.net (Joseph R. Dietrich) wrote:
>Anyway, another thing to consider is that there are other ways for a bullet
>to expend its energy rather than just transferring it to the target as
>movement. Bullets deform. It takes energy to do that. In the case of hard
>target, they tend to ricochet (not delivering their full energy) or
>splatter (on a direct hit), assuming they don't penetrate. Then there is
>the shock-absorbing nature of the armor itself (and human tissue). Padding
>in the kevlar (or whatever you are using) acts like a spring, absorbing
>energy and rebounding.

   This goes back to the old TW2K argument over which round was more
'dangerous'/'deadly', the 9mm or the .45.  
   To keep things really hand waving general, the .45 is a large, slow
round, while the 9mm is a smaller, much faster round.

   The .45 has a long reputation as a 'man-stopper' round.  It's very good
at delivering it's energy *into* human type, unarmored targets.  Almost all
of it's energy is spent *in* the target.  Entrance wounds made by the .45
tend to be small.  Exit wounds tend to be very large.  The round is also
subsonic.  A plus when using a noise suppressor.  Kevlar is actually rather
good at stopping the .45 rounds.  The energy of the wide, slow bullet is
absorbed well, and spread out.
 
   The 9mm has greater range, and is generally considered more accurate.
It also has problem with 'over penetration.'  That means that when you
shoot an unarmored human type target, the bullet will quite often pass
right through the target.  The round does not expend all it's energy in the
target.  For round nose jacketed rounds, the size of the entrance and exit
wounds tends to be similar.  It's also a supersonic round.  Even with a
sound suppressor, there is still the supersonic crack of the round
traveling. (hence the manufacture of subsonic 9mm rounds for use in special
sound suppressed weapons modified to handle the underpowered rounds).

   The argument in TW2K is that most folks in a combat zone is wearing a
flack jacket, and the supersonic 9mm round was a greater threat than the
big slow .45 round.

   The 9mm's overpenetration issue can be solved by hollowpointing.  This
process does make Kevlar vests more effective in stopping the bullet.  You
would still get the blunt trauma damage, but not the much more deadly
penetration damage.

   To drag Traveller game mechanics into this, 'explosive' pistol sized
rounds have generally been mapped to hollowpoints, rather than actual
explosive rounds found in much larger rounds.  For the non-firearm
gearheads out there, hollowpointing causes the round to rapidly expand on
impact.  This increases the size of the wound cavity, thus increasing
internal bleeding.  It also makes the transfer of the rounds kinetic energy
much more efficient.


- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
eclipse@ultranet.com                        All Opinions are Mine. All Mine! 
"We staunch traditionalists know that appearence is everything. Technique is 
nowhere near as important as having your pleats straight when you die" 
- - Steve Gombosi      http://www.ultranet.com/~eclipse/
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
- --

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 22:50:54 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: Winded

On Thu, 28 Aug 1997 10:49:59 -0400, Mark Urbin wrote:

> David Smart <dsmart@flash.net> wrote:
> >Mark Urbin wrote:
> [snip] 
> >I take it, then, from this and the posts following the above that the
> >"Thud gun" should be considered useless?
> 
>    Well, no.  The Thud gun works differently.  It delivers a low velocity,
> heavy, and wide projectile.  It's not designed to penatrate, just deliver
> kenitic engergy efficently to the target.
> 
>    The projectile is much slower, bigger, and heavier than a bullet.  
> By going slow, and by being big, the thud gun projecticle ignores the
> 'blowthrough' rule that effects much faster, smaller rounds.

Actually, it doesn't ignore the "blowthrough" rule.  It doesn't do
enough damage (1d6) to even be a candidate.  If it did do more damage,
then the rule would most likely take effect :)

James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 22:50:56 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: Winded

On Thu, 28 Aug 1997 11:19:41 -0400 (EDT), John Macpherson wrote:

>  
> jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay) said:
>  > > 	This basic physics note has been brought to you by your friendly 
> > > neighborhood social scientist. :-)
> > 
> > Thanks, "friendly neighbourhood social scientist"!  :)
> > 
> > Actually, what are the units for momentum?  Metre-grams per second?
> > KE is measured in Joules.  What is momentum measured in (I was
> > probably asleep in class when they mentioned that "mass*velocity"
> > thing)?
> 
> 	Well, as Stewart Eyres (a _real_ scientist) reminded us, the 
> units are Newton*seconds.  I admit that I couldn't remember the name for 
> kg*m/sec so left it off.  Since Newtons are a measure of force (kg*m/sec^2) 
> it's obvious that kg*m/sec is a Newton*sec.

*whoosh* (the sound of my high school physics rushing back at me)

*thwack* (sound of above, at moment of impact)

And all this time I thought Newtons were little pastry thingies with
fruit filling :)

James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 05:10:02 +0000 ()
From: kraehe@bakunin.hb.north.de (Michael Koehne)
Subject: about WebRing

Hy folks,

	my new homepage is up and running, and as I'll become
	a member of the webring, I started to browse what the
	52 before me had published.

	And I encountered several problems with to fancy designs.

	- Colors are perhaps nice if you have them, a lot of pages
	  are unreadable because they want to be black-on-black,
	  or white-on-white ;-(

	  e.g. from the webring list :

	  <body text="000000" link="800000" vlink="ff8000" bgcolor="ffffff" >

	  evalutes that a vlink is invisible ;(

	  Ethans and ISBA Site are other examples ;(

	- Frames are ok as long as they dont contain links to other
	  sites. I often had to reload my homepage as even 1152x900
	  was becoming to small - frames into frames into frames ....
	  Frames are for INTERNAL navigation on a site. They should
	  be used like a href# tag for internal navigation between
	  related documents.

	- Some sites think that anybody has a Convex directly connected
	  to an national backbone. It is ok to provide a java applet on
	  a subsequent page (e.g I've waited for the new full sector
	  viewer on Ethans page) Its OK to wait for something I wanted
	  to see, but its not so good to overstuff the front page.
	  VAG: can you imagine how your page displays on a Sun3/50.
	  Killing the browser from an attached terminal was the fasted
	  solution.

	Perhaps web designers should remeber that less is often more.

	Its now 5'clock in the morning I've enjoyed the surfing, a lot
	of deckplans, scenario ideas, aso.  I've "stolen" some code
	fragments and one gif from designes I liked for my frontpage,
	so it was even productive.  The WebRing is a great idea,
	and showed that Traveller has a productive comunity for a
	living game.

By Michael

PS	Can somebody check my layout on dos type browsers (N$3,M$Exploder)
	or other unusual ones (Arena-HotJava-Mosaic)
- -- 
	kraehe@bakunin.north.de			human.is-bremen.de/~kraehe
		  " ceterum censeo MSDOS esse delendam "

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1757
***********************************
Traveller-digest      Friday, August 29 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1758



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Winded
Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)
Re: Boredom and homicidal insanity in Traveller
A Task System for All
Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)
April Fool
Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)
Universal Range Bands
Re: Task Resolution
HEPlaR fuel in FF&S2 was Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations
Clones in the 3rd imperium
<->
Re: A Task System for All
Re: Career paths
Re: Universal Range Bands
Re: Winded
More Classic Traveller for sale!

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 19:23:13 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: Re: Winded

That's not a shotgun, this is a shotgun!!!

   I posted this TNE shotgun design once before, but it deserves a
revisit given the topic at hand.

AS-2B1 "Warhammer" Assault Shotgun

TL: 12
Manufacturer: Aurora Enterprises
Ammo: 18x90mm (8 projectiles per shell)
Muzzle Energy: 4,878 joules (total)
Weapon Length: 91.24cm
Weapon Weight: 7.75 kg loaded, 7.36 kg empty (includes weight of empty
box magazine); Model 201 - 7.25 kg loaded, 6.86 kg empty (includes 
weight of empty box magazine)
Weapon Price: Cr 1,830.97; Model 201 - Cr 1,530.97
Magazine Weight: 1.38 kg loaded, 0.99 kg empty
Magazine Price: Slug/pellet - Cr 27.49; Tranq Pellet - Cr 41.23; HEAP
slug - Cr 54.97; Flechette - Cr 82.46; HEAP Flechette - Cr 123.68 (all 
loaded).  Cr 13.75 (empty)
Ammunition Weight: 68.7 g per round
Ammunition Price: Slug/pellet - Cr 0.69; Tranq Pellet - Cr 1.37; HEAP 
slug - Cr 2.06; Flechette - Cr 3.44; HEAP Flechette - Cr 5.50
Features: Bullpup stock, optic sight, laser sight, gyroscopic
compensator, muzzle break
                                                     -Recoil-
Round              ROF   Dam Val Pen Rtg  Bulk   Mag   SS  Burst   S.R. 
18x90mm Slug       5       5     3-4-Nil   6     20    2     3      36
HEAP slug          5       9      2-2-2                             27
Pellet (short)     5      2x6       1                               24
       (medium)   5x5*     2       Nil
Flechette (short)  5      2x8       1                               24
          (medium)5x5*     2       Nil
HEAP Flech (short) 5      3x8     2-2-2                             18
          (medium)5x5*     3      2-2-2                                
Tranq Pell (short) 5      1x6**    Nil                             
14           (medium) 5x5*     1***   
Nil                                 

Note: Maximum range with laser sight is 240 meters

*   Each shot is rolled as a 5 round burst
**  A hit indicates that 6 (in the case of all pellet type rounds) or 8 
(in the case of all flechette type) projectiles from the round have hit 
the target, each with the specified amount of damage (pellet/flechette:
2D6, HEAP flechette: 3D6, Tranq pellet: 1D6) and the listed penetration 
rating.
*** 1D6 points of damage plus tranq effect on TNE, page 350.

Notes: A HEAP flechette round contains 8 finned darts each of which has
a HEAP warhead.  A discarding sabot version of this round would
theoretically be possible, but even I have a limit on overkill.  This
design was originally conceived of as low cost weapon for stopping
armored troops, but after a slight rules clarification (well change), it
was no longer as effective.  Still, against targets in anything but
battledress, it is generally "one shot, one kill".

   About shotgun damage in the real world: Shotguns at medium to long
range basically have no knockdown power.  This is particularly true if
you are using what is called "bird shot", lots of tiny pellets in the
round (I've been told stories about relatives loading up their shotgun
with rock salt to deter trespassers, but I digress).  However, the fewer
the pellets in the round, the more energy each has.  By the time you get
to 000 (8 large pellets in the round), and you move into close range,
the target *will* be knocked down unless he is a mountain gorilla.

   Having fired a lot of shotguns, I can tell you that they *do* have a
kick and unless you are prepared for it, you will have a nice bruise the
next day.  In fact, I've heard of smaller frame people seperating
shoulders while firing a shotgun.  These are not weapons that you fire
casually.

Regards,

Harold

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 19:02:30 -0700
From: David Smart <dsmart@flash.net>
Subject: Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)

Traveller-digest wrote:
> 
> Traveller-digest     Wednesday, August 27 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1753
> 
> (R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
> All rights reserved.
> 
James Lindsay wrote:
> 
> On Sun, 24 Aug 1997 16:44:27 -0700, Douglas E. Berry wrote:
> 
> > The Tactical Action Combat System, version 2.1
<snip>
> > Combatant Turn Sequence.
> >
> > 2 Action Phase:  Starting with the combatant with the lowest AP total, all
>                                                         ^^^^^^
> >                  combatants perform their desired actions for the turn.
> 
> This has been in debate since RPG combat systems came into existence.
> Some people believe that the "slowest" or "most disadvantaged"
> opponent should go first, allowing others to react to that opponent.
> Others believe that it should be the other way around, allowing
> "faster" or "more advantaged" opponents the chance to eliminate
> potential threats (ie: getting shot at by the enemy) before they get a
> chance to act against *them*.  Your choice to use the former method
> is, of course, your own.
> 
> Might I suggest an alternative that can be used, perhaps, as an
> optional rule:
> 
> The combatants are allowed to expend _up_to_half_ their APs beginning
> with the combatant with the HIGHEST AP total (they do not have to
> expend any APs if they so choose).  Once the last combatant has had a
> chance to expend APs (up to half of their total), the order of play
> reverses.  Combatants now expend their remaining APs, beginning with
> the individual with the LOWEST AP total.  This allows combatants with
> superior AP totals to act first if they so choose, while still
> allowing them to react to APs spent by their slower opponents.
 
Also, allow the combatants with the higher APs to use them to begin
actions which may take the entire turn or even more than one turn
to complete and provide them with the option of aborting such an
action during the last half of the turn. Such an abort results in
the loss of expended APs but allows the APs allocated to the original
action to be assigned to subsequent actions.

> > Blowthrough.
> >
> > The maximum damage done by melee weapons, slug throwers, laser, and
> > fragments is based on the mass of the target:
> 
> I'd limit this to simply slug throwers.  Any swung melee weapon that
> comes to a stop inside a target effectively transfers all of its
> energy to that target.  Projectiles fired from firearms often do not
> (and those that do are generally low-powered to begin with).
> 

I'd like to know what happens to a round which actually "blows through"
a target (if it's in the rules, I've missed it). Does it have a chance
of hitting someone/thing downrange? What are the odds and penetration
damage potential? Admittedly, this adds complexity and, therefore, can
increase the "roll-playing" at the cost of potentially boring players
not taking an active part in being shot. Of course, I've never found
_not_ being shot to be boring...

> > Telescopic Sights.
> >
> > Sights are rated for magnification.  When a weapon equipped with telescopic
> > sights is fired from a braced position, divide the range to the target (in
> > meters) by the magnification of the sight for to hit purposes only.  Using
> > a telescopic sight requires spending 4AP, which does not count as extra AP
> > for aiming.
> 
> True or false... should telescopic sights only be beneficial versus
> stationary or slow moving targets?  Wouldn't an evading target move
> outside the sighting radius of the scope, making it awkward to keep
> the sights fixed on the target?

Good point.

I can see using the sights in conjunction with a laser pointing device to help
offset a scope's "field of view" limitations on tracking rapidly moving
targets. On the other hand, the same FoV limitations could make leading the
target rather difficult, possibly negating any advantage provided by the laser
pointer. I guess it depends on the target's speed relative to the shooter.
There's a big difference between sighting on a tossed basketball at 100 yards/
300 meters and trying to track a pheasant startled from the bush at the same
range.

Anyone have Real World experience with this kind of sighting
arrangement?

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 15:21:59 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Boredom and homicidal insanity in Traveller

In mail you write:

> UNOFFICIAL FACILITIES
>         Not all facilities at a starport come under the jurisdiction
> of the Port Authority.
>         The Scout Lounge. Those who conduct surveys of star systems
> and who continually venture out into unexplored or under-explored
> space are a special type of people. After long periods of time alone
> or with their fellow crew, they naturally gravitate to others of
> their kind...  to share stories and experiences which may help them
> survive.  The typical starport has a Scout Lounge for this type of
> people.
>         The Scout Lounge is usually operates as a semi-private club;
> theoretically anyone can use its services, but in practice it is only
> patronized comfortably by scouts (and those with an affinity for
> scouts).

Scouts got groupies? :-)
(forgive the BC reference)

>         The Hiring Hall. Crew members looking for work gather at the
> hiring hall.  Ships calling at the starport look first to the hiring
> hall when they need new or replacement crew. Because of ship
> schedules which must be met, it is possible for a crew person to be
> hired and off world within a few hours notice.

Hiring halls feature prominently in several of Andre Norton's stories.
One of the reasons I recommend them. :-)

>         The Lone Star. Many starports have a recreation facility
> which welcomes and serves all comers. At its tables, people meet and
> enjoy light music or video, conversation, and meals. To many the Lone
> Star is an opportunity to meet others on a casual basis, to develop
> acquaintances, and even grow them into friendships.

And for the worlds settled by "Asian" types, we have tea houses and
other such amenities. 

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 11:13:55 +1000 (EST)
From: "D.Moodie" <dmoodie@st.nepean.uws.edu.au>
Subject: A Task System for All

> Task System Debate (zzzz...)

I suggested options for Task systems because face it; you'll never
completely agree with each other on this point (or any other). So I
suggest that Mr Miller makes his changes but adds a little side note
saying feel free to use other task systems - just stay consistent and
no-one can complain. Remember Traveller is a possible future in a parallel
universe which just happens to be very similar to ours, so if some things
aren't quite accurate enough, just pull the old 'different laws of nature'
like TNE did to explain Gravitic Focusing (and they could've argued away
Virus better too). FF&S always gave you optional technologies that broke
the laws, so it can't hurt to bend probabilities a bit.   

(Oh and if you want my opinion: stats should govern a players ability to
learn a skill. You can't learn to use a broadsword if your a wimp!)

					'M."Dmoodie

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 01:27:38 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)

On Thu, 28 Aug 1997 09:28:55 -0700, Douglas E. Berry wrote:

> >The combatants are allowed to expend _up_to_half_ their APs beginning
> >with the combatant with the HIGHEST AP total (they do not have to
> >expend any APs if they so choose).  Once the last combatant has had a
> >chance to expend APs (up to half of their total), the order of play
> >reverses.  Combatants now expend their remaining APs, beginning with
> >the individual with the LOWEST AP total.  This allows combatants with
> >superior AP totals to act first if they so choose, while still
> >allowing them to react to APs spent by their slower opponents.
> 
> I tried something similar in the beginning, it bogged down when you had PCs
> with 20 APs using them all on a single shot task, freezing out slower
> characters.  This forces the slower PCs to commit first.  Of course, if you
> have a combatant with 10 or fewer APs, he should be spending a great deal
> of time under cover, hoarding his APs for reaction shots.

Well, at least you didn't say "YOINKS & GADZOOKS!"  But see below...

> >> Whenever two or more combatants come into to conflict, or any situation
> >> where it is important to determine who moves first, use the following task:
> >
> >I am a bit confused here.  Is this procedure only necessary if two
> >combatants have identical AP totals, or simply if two characters wish
> >to-- as an example-- open the same iris valve during the same combat
> >turn?  It seems to be in conflict with Section II.
> 
> Whenever two or more combatants wish to do something that will affect the
> other combatants.  Example:  It's A's turn, and he declares that he's going
> to move down the hall.  B announces she's going to shot at A.  C announces
> that he's going to try and tackle B before she can shoot.  All three
> players have to roll the Initative task.  Also, not that all those declared
> actions have been committed.. If B moves first, and hits A, then C is still
> committed to the grapple.
> 
> I'll also make more explicit that *any combatant* with avalible AP can
> attempt an Intiative task at any point.  This is why you hoard the things!

So, people first announce how they are going to spend their APs (in
order) and _then_ they carry them out (in order)?

If this is true, I can see how this method would be more realistic by
allowing slower players to try and attempt tasks before faster players
but it does mean additional task rolls for initiative determination.
It is also random compared to simply going in order of AP totals.

My method (listed above), OTOH, wouldn't bother with task rolls for
determining "who moves first" (it has already been settled according
to the order that players are allowed to expend their APs).  Perhaps a
randomizer would help with the problem of a predictable action order
(ie: DEX+INT+Tactics+1d6)?

> <On Melee>
> 
> >Assuming the defender was wise enough to retain enough APs to, in
> >fact, dodge or block the attack :)
> 
> The number of times that my playtesters had to stand there and suck up
> damage....  <grin>

Ey!  Sco'ish Boxin a' its boney best!"

I played in a GURPS Martial Arts campaign once, set in 1,000 AD China.
While everyone else played characters with various realistic and
cinematic martial art abilities, I went with a Scottish Boxer (Angus
McHaggis).  It was a blast!

> >> Range and Aiming AP:
> 
> >You might want to include the optional EA rule regarding absolute
> >maximum range of certain weapons (ie: two range bands beyond the Aimed
> >Fire Range).  It is, after all, a combat-related rule designed to
> >mimic the limitations of most weaponry and should be included in any
> >set of potential combat rules.
> 
> How about:  "The maximum range for any firearm is two range bands beyond
> the printed effective range.  Aimed fire beyond that range is not possible
> under any circumstance.  Example:  A pistol with an effective range of Very
> Short would have a max range of Medium."

Greg Porter couldn't have said it better :)

> >> Autofire, Shotguns, and Flechettes:
> 
> This is one of the trickier areas.. I've had a number of suggestions on how
> to handle supressive fire.  I'll give yours a shot.  (no pun intended.)

[snip]
 
> >Shotguns have always been a pain to represent accurately in any RPG.
> >Might I suggest simply using a +DM and a damage multiplier and be done
> >with it :)
> 
> For full auto, maybe.  Shotguns are a very useful weapon, so I'm more
> inclined to make sure that their unique abilities are modeled correctly.
> For the most part, I've found that shotguns get used at ranges that don't
> require the multishot rules.

Perhaps use the existing DMs and Damage Multipliers for autofire and
shotguns for the basic rules and use the more advanced rules as
optional rules.  That way, skirmishes can be played out using either
set of rules, depending on how fast the GM wants combat to flow.

> In one playtest, my wife's character (STR-6 Pistol-1 17AP)
> was in a concealed position and fired one shot at a target at Very Short
> range.  She spent 4AP for the action, plus *10* for aiming, raising her
> target number from seven to seventeen!

Might I humbly suggest a rule governing the maximum number of APs that
may be used in a single aiming action?  Maybe limited by "2x the
user's skill rating" or something like that...

> >> Blowthrough.
> 
> First of all, remove melee weapons from that list.  Secondly, If I take
> lasers out, it creates a "super-class" of weapon that isn't subject to the
> rules.

Hmmm... I guess I'm more for altering the actual weapon itself
(availability, function, efficiency, cost, etc.), rather than change
how lasers physically react with fleshy targets.

> >Lasers superheat flesh, causing surface explosions due to the rapidly
> >expanding water in the tissue.  The vapourized water and flesh also
> >absorb much of the energy of the laser beam, leaving little energy
> >left to burn a hole out the back of the victim.  In essence, most
> >lasers would probably drop all of their energy into the target and
> >would not be subjected to the Blowthrough rule (unless he was a
> >wabbit).
> 
> Rabbits are immune to lasers.  Don't ask.  

What about Golfs, Beetles, and Vanagons?

> You make a good point, but my research seems to indicate that the steam
> around the wound will interfere with the beam itself.  I understand this is
> a common problem in industrial applications of laser cutting.

rEsEaRcH!!!  Exactly *WHAT* have you been doing with your free time,
man!?!

Bullets cause hydrostatic shock by causing the wound cavity to balloon
outwards temporarily (ooch!) while lasers cause much more serious
explosive damage (OOCH!).  IMHO, a laser would yield a much larger
permanent wound cavity than a bullet.  But I'm not the one doing
research in how steam around a laser wound disrupts the beam :)

The point is that the steam does absorb most of the remaining laser
beam energy and that superheated steam persists in and around the
target for at least a while.  Perhaps a 4d6 maximum damage rule for
lasers? (running & ducking to avoid numerous small hurled objects)

> I left plasma weapons off simply because they do damage in several
> different ways.  As you say, they are highly kinetic, very hot, and splash.
>  This leads me to bleive that they will do great amounts of hurt even as
> the pass through a body.

Perhaps a 6d6 maximum damage rule for plasma weapons? (running &
ducking to avoid numerous LARGE hurled objects)

> You want credit as a developer?

Oh, yes please!  I'd love to see my name up in ligh-- I mean, "10 pt
Times Roman" :)



James W. Lindsay    Vancouver, British Columbia
 "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

       If it nay Sco'ish... its Crraaaap!

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 21:52:23 -0400 (EDT)
From: GDWGAMES@aol.com
Subject: April Fool

>> I think TNE fans deserve a conclusion
>>to their milleau.
>
>Empress Iolanthe (sp?) wakes up to see Strephon taking a shower...

Actually, we did this in an "April' Fool" issue of Challenge...few people
seemed to get it.

Loren Wiseman

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 01:46:20 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)

On Thu, 28 Aug 1997 19:02:30 -0700, David Smart wrote:

> Anyone have Real World experience with this kind of sighting
> arrangement?

Doug does.  He's doing research involving shooting people with laser
beams to determine how much the steam (produced by vapourised flesh)
affects the beam itself :P

James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

Date: 28 Aug 1997 20:03 CDT
From: "Robert Eaglestone" <eaglesto@nortel.ca>
Subject: Universal Range Bands

Allright, don't ask me why, but I got to wondering if
ranges could be classified under one code, and I came
up with this:

UNIVERSAL RANGE BAND CODE

Code		       Range			        A.U.
- --------------------------------------------------------------------
0	              0m - 3m                       Contact
1	              4m - 15m                      V. Close
2	             16m - 45m                      Close
3	             46m - 150m                     Medium
4	            151m - 450m                     Long
5	            451m - 1500m                    V. Long
6	           1501m - 10km                     Subregional
7	            11km - 30km			    Regional
8	            31km - 300km                    Subcontinental
9	           301km - 3000km                   Continental
A	          3001km - 30,000km		    Orbital (to 0.002 A.U.)
B	        30,001km - 300,000km		    Far Orbit (to 0.02 A.U.)
C	       300,001km - 150,000,000km            0.02 - 1.0    A.U.
D	   150,000,001km - 1,500,000,000km	    1.0  - 10.0   A.U.
E	 1,500,000,001km - 15,000,000,000km        10.0  - 100    A.U.
F	15,000,000,001km - 150,000,000,000km      100    - 1000   A.U.
G      150,000,000,001km - 1,500,000,000,000km   1000    - 10000  A.U.


Now, it's very possible that there are some tables out there I 
don't know about, but this is what I gleaned from the T4 rules
plus CSC's Communicator range tables.  I stuck them together
nice and friendly-like and added solar system sized measurements
at the end, to handle most solar systems including far companion
systems.

The big glitch I see now is that it doesn't really include ORBITS
in the code system... maybe I should try to do that to REALLY
make it universal... hmmm... that might increase the table size
over 10 bands, so maybe not.  Any suggestions?

Why do this?  Mostly out of curiosity.  Ok?

Rob

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 03:26:49 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

> No.  The poll asked if the there was _any_ problem with the system
> that they thought should be changed (or in fact, if they simply
> prefered another system, which was why I was, in fact, counted
> among those 85).  It was _not_ "do you think stat should count
> more than skill?".

Wrong again, David.  It all started when I made a plea to Marc, and 
in that plea I described a man having a heart attack.  I asked if it 
made sense for the paramedic (Edu-10, Medical-1) to operate versus 
the surgeon (Edu-6, Medical-4).

Marc wrote back, stating that he understands that I have serious 
issues with the task system in T4, but I had no support.  He asked if 
there were even 50 people out there who supported me in this.

The TML exploded, and withing 24 hours, there were 80 people who 
wrote in to Marc's challenge.

Get your facts straight.

Kenneth.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 22:57:10 -0400
From: "Chris Cox" <chriscox@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: HEPlaR fuel in FF&S2 was Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations

John Macpherson wrote:
>> tconnor@pop3.utoledo.edu (Tim Connors) said:

>> For a 932 Td hull, I figured 81.55 kl of LHyd per G-turn (1/2 hour)
>> from FF&S2.

> You made a mistake somewhere here.  932 Td hull with an average 
> density of 10 tonnes/Td is 9320 tonnes requiring 93200 kN thrust.

In FF&S2 starships have an assumed density of 14tonnes/Td and not 10
tonnes/Td like they did in FF&S.  This change in assumed density is why
HEPlaR appears to be less efficient, when in reality HEPlaR is the same as it
was in FF&S as John has pointed out earlier.  

Chris Cox
"If Fosters is Austrailian for beer, why does it come from Canada?"
(chriscox@ix.netcom.com)
The Draconis Cluster Traveller pages
(http://users.aol.com/yanbeck/trav.htm)

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 00:21:50 -0400
From: Daniel Poulin <pould@netcom.ca>
Subject: Clones in the 3rd imperium

OK people, let's see what can come up of that one.

I have read the small references in the Regency sourcebook on clones.  I am
interested to know if anyone has anything somewhere on the status of clones
in the 3rd imperium?

Daniel Poulin
pould@netcom.ca

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 00:35:43 -0400
From: "Michael D. Peters" <Letterworks@Comten.com>
Subject: <->

Just a real quick note, I'm in the middle of reconstructing a major
hardware crash in my PC, but I picked up FF&S2 and saw the infamous
<->symbols. On showing them to my significant other (who works in the
art/print realm) she laughed. It seems she's seen this happen before.
Somewhere between IG and their printer they hae a software glitch the
printer's typesetting program read the * and broke it into three parts <
- - >. According to her she ran into the same problem with one printer she
deals with and has switched to a simple x for multiplication when
dealing with him. So now we all calm down a bit. This time, at least, it
wasn't IG's fault! Now the missing tables are another matter...
Mike Peters

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 97 00:12:09 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: A Task System for All

On 08/29/97 at 11:13 AM,  "D.Moodie" <dmoodie@st.nepean.uws.edu.au> said:

>(Oh and if you want my opinion: stats should govern a players ability to
>learn a skill. You can't learn to use a broadsword if your a wimp!)

Just have to ask...which one Traveller's characteristics covers wimpyness? 
;->

Let's take Ferdinand, he's got a STR and CON of 12, but he wouldn't hurt a
fly..he'd rather smell the flowers.  He sure could wield a broadsword, but
no matter how good he might be in practice he's not good in real combat
because he just doesn't want to hurt anybody.  Then there's Rat, she's got
a STR and CON of 7, but she's a vicious and cunning fighter, give her half
a chance and she'll cut your heart out and throw it in your face.  Given
equal training, Ferdi will always *look* like he should win, but Rat
will...

It seems to me that there is a lot to a character that isn't covered by the
characteristics.


Eris,
    Ok, I prefer CONstitution because that way I don't mix it up with
    EDUcation.  ;->     
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 01:33:30 -0400
From: Bill Rutherford <worj@topgun.cinecom.com>
Subject: Re: Career paths

At 12:13 PM 8/28/97 EST, Stewart wrote:

<Snip>...
>Yes, but is that 7 positions in business?  ie. in one Traveller
>career?  Also, how many of those moves occur before age 34 yrs (most I
>suspect, hence the relevancy to Trav).  ...

How 'bout the one-term military enlistee (4 years) who then goes BACK to
school for 4 years, then gets a job, say, as an accountant (4 - 12 years),
or alternately, the ROTC cadet (USA College programs for those non US
residents out there) who takes a commission, serves 4 years active duty,
then pursues a civilian career...  
>...I think the Traveller rule
>of one-career before adventuring is straight forward, and could be
>said to reflect the essential stability needed to maintain an
>interstellar state....  

Except that, esp. for military one-termers, two careers is the norm...
Maybe some elegant, simple mechanism would allow going from a military
career to a civilian career...





Bill Rutherford
worj@topgun.cinecom.com

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 01:45:44 +0000
From: Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: Universal Range Bands

Robert Eaglestone wrote:
> 
> Allright, don't ask me why, but I got to wondering if
> ranges could be classified under one code, and I came
> up with this:
> 
> UNIVERSAL RANGE BAND CODE

> Now, it's very possible that there are some tables out there I
> don't know about, but this is what I gleaned from the T4 rules
> plus CSC's Communicator range tables.  

Just FYI.  There is a large range table listed on the T4 Ref's Screen
that is similar to this.

Kenneth.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 09:29:31 +0100
From: Stewart Eyres <spe@astro.keele.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Winded

Hi there

I've just read a story which might be related to the idea of being
knocked about by bullets, etc.:

"A FORMER policeman survived a lightning strike yesterday because of
his rubber flip-flops.

"David Jarvis, 54, was sent flying by the thunderbolt during one of the
storms which marked the end of one of the hottest Augusts on record.

"Mr Jarvis was thrown 15 feet into the air before being dumped at the
bottom of his drive."
			(Electronic Torygraph, Friday 29 August 1997)

Where is the momentum in a lightening bolt?  Clearly, the energy from
the bolt had to escape some how, and was translated into a force, and
so into momentum applied to David Jarvis, 54.  While the physics of
the conversion of thunderbolt energy into Jarvis momentum is different
in detail, surely the principle is valid?  That is, the energy of a
bullet/shotgun pellets/etc. has to be dissipated some how, and not
always enitirely by directly damaging the target.  

Perhaps all PCs should where flip-flops.

Stewart Eyres <spe@astro.keele.ac.uk>

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 06:58:47 -0400 (EDT)
From: FKiesche@aol.com
Subject: More Classic Traveller for sale!

Greetings All:

Once again Mike Cox of Dragon's Trove has a number of Traveller items
available. Please contact him at drgntrov@mars.superlink.net if you are
interested.

Again--send mail to: drgntrov@mars.superlink.net

....not to me!

Thanks!

N259 - Book #0, Introduction to Traveller (GDW) - Near Mint  $3.00
N260 - Introductory Adv. The Imperial Fringe (GDW) - Near Mint  $4.00
N254 - Book #4, Mercenary (GDW, Traveller) - Near Mint  $13.00
N255 - Book #5, High Guard (GDW, Traveller) - Near Mint  $13.00   2 copies
N256 - Book #6, Scouts (GDW, Traveller) - Near Mint  $13.00
N257 - Book #7, Merchant Prince (GDW, Traveller) - Near Mint  $14.00
N258 - Adventure #6, Expedition to Zhodane (GDW, Traveller) - Near Mint $7.00
N252 - Journal of the Travellers Aid Society #2 (GDW) - VG/NM, small price tag mark, minor staple rust.  $22.00
N253 - Journal fo the Travellers Aid Society #3 (GDW) - VG/NM shape, some cover dirtines, some staple rust.  $20.00
N214 - Starship Operators Manual Vol. 1 (Digest Group, Traveller) - Near Mint  $28.00
N216 - Megatraveller Ref Gaming Kit (Digest Group, Traveller) - Near Mint. $12.00
N215 - World Builders Guidebook (Digest Group, Traveller) - Near Mint  $30.00

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1758
***********************************
Traveller-digest      Friday, August 29 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1759



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1
Re: about WebRing
Why I'm (probably) ditching T4
Re: Ships of the Interstellar Wars
ALL TORONTONIANS ON THE TML
Clones in the 3rd imperium
Re:Sanity,Boredom and homicidal insanity
Re: Kinetic Energy vs. Momentum
Re: <->
Re: Universal Range Bands
Re: KE
Re: April Fool

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 12:17:14 +0000
From: "Martin F C Pickett" <ceemfcp@cee.hw.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1

"Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net> wrote:

> At 09:37 PM 8/27/97 GMT, James W. Lindsay wrote:
>
> >Lasers superheat flesh, causing surface explosions due to the rapidly
> >expanding water in the tissue.  The vapourized water and flesh also
> >absorb much of the energy of the laser beam, leaving little energy
> >left to burn a hole out the back of the victim.  In essence, most
> >lasers would probably drop all of their energy into the target and
> >would not be subjected to the Blowthrough rule (unless he was a
> >wabbit).
>
> You make a good point, but my research seems to indicate that the steam
> around the wound will interfere with the beam itself.  I understand this is
> a common problem in industrial applications of laser cutting.

From my slightly superficial and somewhat out of date knowledge of 
medical laser systems, I would have to agree with Doug here.  For IR 
range lasers, as James says, when you zap some flesh the immediate 
result is that you dessicate it, then crisp it.  The vapourised water 
expands out of the wound ejecting the burnt flesh.  This actually 
limits the damage caused by 'honking big weapons grade' lasers in two 
ways:

1) The aforementioned cloud of water vapour and flesh will dissipate 
the beam by means of both further absorption and also diffraction.  
This is probably a fairly minor fraction of the total beam energy.

2) Genuine honest-to-dog blowthrough - any laser powerful enough to 
drill through clothes, armour etc and be sure of significantly 
damaging tissue underneath will almost certainly drill a hole right 
through the target and out the other side on most occasions.

As an illustration of the potential for blowthrough, I will mention a 
rather, erm, 'eccentric' consultant neurosurgeon working in Bristol 
(I think).  This gentleman took possesion of a brand-new SofTA laser 
scalpel, (rated at around 50W) capable of cutting a 1mm square hole 
in brain tissue at a rate of ~1cm/sec.  After a few months, he went 
to his laser advisor (who also happened to be my lecturer), and 
asked him for a more powerful system.  So the advisor produced a 
system rated at around 100W, or ~2cm/sec.  A few months later, the 
consultant came to him again, complaining that the new system was 
almost a useless as the last, and brain tumor operations were taking 
hours longer than when he was using a normal scalpel.  So the advisor 
got hold a system that would cut at ~10cm/sec, and sat in on a tumor 
operation.

It turns out that 'eccentric' neurosurgeon was using the laser 
scalpel to *vapourise* brain tumors, some of them as large as an 
orange!  What happens if he gets distracted during the operation?

'Doctor?'
'Yes nurse?'
<BBZZAAAAAPP>
'You've just punched a hole right through the patient's head.'
'Thank you for pointing that out, nurse.'

My lecturer stopped advising the neurosurgical department of the 
hospital at about the same time that the consultant started 
communicating with Ferranti to purchase one of their 5kW systems.  
Fortunately for all those neurosurgical patients in Bristol, Ferranti 
went bust shortly afterwards - every cloud, and all that.

On the other hand, the loon did have a rather enterprising idea for 
using a large laser system - mobile cremations.  You buy laser system 
capable of vapourising a whole human body, and fit it into a lorry.  
Then you provide a service whereby you drive to the location that the 
deceased would like their ashed scattered over, hold a funeral, feed 
the coffin into the lorry, collect the ashes at the other end and 
scatter as desired.

The downside with this is that currently you would need a second 
lorry to hold the power supply, and a handy 3-phase outlet nearby to 
plug in.  But if you can fit your lorry with fusion+...

'Can't afford the burial in space that grandpa always wanted?  Don't 
want your body fed into the organic recyclers?  Well, call on 
Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Funeral Services!

'RGFS are proud to annouce the most stylish economy service of all 
time.  Based on the ancient Terran tradition of cremation, we will 
provide a simple yet elegant traditional Sylean funeral service 
(religious denomimation of your request also available for a small 
extra fee), and at the conclusion the body will glide gracefully into 
the hopper of the tastefully discrete "RGFS VapourMan System (TM)", 
to be transformed into lifegiving organic carbon residue and spread 
across the nearby planetary surface (subject to relevant 
permissions).  Alternatively, for just a small extra cost, the 
service can be held in the RGFS memorial orchard, where a small plot 
can be forever grandpa!'

All the above really assumes that we are working with IR or close
wavelengths for our lasers.  If we move to UV wavelengths, the laser
doesn't work by vapourising the tissue.  Instead, it works by
breaking the molecular bonds - it literally disassociates the flesh.
I guess one explanation for disintegrators is a hand-held excimer
laser with a high enough power to vape people.

> >> Plasma/Fusion weapons and explosions are exempt from the Blowthrough rule.
> 
> >I'm probably the only one that thinks plasma weapons *should* use the
> >blowthrough rule.  Plasma bolts are high velocity projectiles.  The
> >heat they possess would not affect the target to any great degree due
> >to the amount of time the bolt actually remains inside the target.
> >The resulting "plasma splash" (the "explosive" damage) and "heat beam"
> >(half the "explosive" damage) would be cumulative, however, since the
> >suit is now breached and will not protect the individual from the
> >intense heat.
> 
> I left plasma weapons off simply because they do damage in several
> different ways.  As you say, they are highly kinetic, very hot, and splash.
>  This leads me to bleive that they will do great amounts of hurt even as
> the pass through a body.

How are plasma weapons actually supposed to work (I don't have EA)?  
I always had this vision of a garden hose spewing out glowing purple 
icky stuff that blackens and fries anything it touches, but that's 
obviously not at all realistic.

Do plasma weapons shoot out a smallish 'bolt' of plasma at very high 
speeds?  What would that look like?  I would guess that it would just 
be a small, very bright, line if the speed is that high (1000's of 
m/s?)

Martin
Martin Pickett 
ceemfcp@cee.hw.ac.uk
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are alive, well and living on Sylea 

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 12:10:00 +0100
From: Bruce E J Lewis <bruce@legend.ftech.co.uk>
Subject: Re: about WebRing

At 05:10 28/08/97 +0000, Michael Koehne wrote:
>Hy folks,
>
>	And I encountered several problems with to fancy designs.
>
>	- Colors are perhaps nice if you have them, a lot of pages
>	  are unreadable because they want to be black-on-black,
>	  or white-on-white ;-(
>
	Yes, many pages have things like blue on black, or red on black, and are
so difficult to read.

>	- Frames are ok as long as they dont contain links to other
>	  sites. I often had to reload my homepage as even 1152x900
>	  was becoming to small - frames into frames into frames ....
>	  Frames are for INTERNAL navigation on a site. They should
>	  be used like a href# tag for internal navigation between
>	  related documents.
>
	Frames can link to other sites perfectly well. Anyone who codes HTML
should put <base target="_top"> at the beginning of a page in a frame that
call another web site, thus...

<html>
<head>
	<title>Web Page Name</title>
<base target="_top">
</head>

	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..."
	Park Lane Stand - Block 44, Row 14, Seat 176

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 11:33:19 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: Why I'm (probably) ditching T4

Well, I picked up "Gateway" at my FLGS yesterday -- and passed on FF&S 2 at the
same time. And I've had a chance to look through Gateway and, frankly, I'm
bloody disgusted.

The level of proofreading displayed in the damn thing displays nothing less than
*either* contempt for the buying public *or* a complete lack of even the most
minimal level of ability.

The first thing that struck my eye was the repeated mis-spellings of <Scout
Corpss> for ghu's sake ... haven't these guys heard of global search and
replace? Or Spell-checking? This is so offensively stupid that it beggars
description!

And it gets worse.

The map on pg. #14 is shown (in the title bar, no less) as having a scale of 1
meter per square ... which, since they have managed to leave out the greyscale 1
meter hexgrid and left in only the five meter gridlines makes the whole base
look like its 10 meters across with 400 mm wide passageways. This is inexcusable
- -- I mean, for ghu's sake, they got it *right* in "The Long Way Home", after
all! How bloody difficult would it have been to copy the d*mn file across
*intact*?

Lacomp's Villa map on page #24 has the same problem.

The Brelan Generation Ship map is in the "Marks of Weakness" Chapter (page #32)
when it *should* be in "The Ark" (page #35) ... and the "Duel Area" map that is
on page #35 should be on page #32. This is inexcusably sloppy.

And the hex-grid that *should* be on "The Duel" is left off, making the goddamn
map virtually useless as printed, and a complete waste of space.

The "Overlapped Ships" map on page #46 also lacks the 1m sub grid, which makes
the ship 9 meters long and about 6 meters wide as drawn. I mean, didn't
*ANYBODY* even bother to *check* the proof copies? Or didn't they even bother to
*DO* bloody proofs?

The Detailed System Data Maps lack the dashed line showing the system plane that
they had in "TLWH"

The Planetary Maps are distorted ... someone didn't even bother to resize the
damn things properly.

And these are just the *OBVIOUS* mistakes. Sure, some of them (like the missing
1 meter mapgrid) can be figured out by people who own TLWH ... but, after all,
IG supposedly want this to be a "stand alone" adventure ... and they've provided
a considerable amount of text to assist in this. So this makes these errors
grossly inexcusable.

And the reason I didn't buy FF&S 2? Perhaps the missing and incorrect tables?
Perhaps the multiplication and division signs that were replaced by brackets?
The poorly laid out formulae? All of the above? Well, yep, pretty much. And, so
what if the corrections are available online, after all, you *cannot* assume
that the entire buying audience for T4 products have Internet access -- or know
of the TML, GDW-beta, or IG Web Page even exist.

Is anyone else aware that IG seems to be actually getting *worse* in their
(pitiful) attempts to publish a great game? They just don't seem to have a clue.

It's not as if it's difficult to do all this -- the "complexity" of the layout
is such that it could be done with any of the major Wordprocessing programs
(Word 97, Wordperfect 8, or AmiPro 96), and could *certainly* be done with even
such a simple DTP program as MS Publisher 97. Since any decent Printer can
handle the files that these programs can create these days, and since the ease
and speed of checking spelling, printing proofs, and changing layout is so
great, there is no possible excuse for the continuing pathetic attempts that are
all that IG *seems* to be capable of!

I won't buy the broken version of FF&S 2, and its increasingly unlikely that any
of the future products that IG produce -- unless I have a detailed look at them
in my FLGS and they prove to have no flaws of the sort that all their products
to date have been inflicted with. The standing order I have for the new "Deluxe
Traveller" will, if they manage to actually fill it (their web page couldn't
take non-US addresses initially -- and I had to order it be directly emailing
their email address ... so I'm not confident) be the *last* item that I am
likely to buy at this rate.

If every other publisher in the business can either a) get it right the *first*
time, or, b) at least improve consistently with each new release, what's wrong
with IG that they *can't*.

I know that this will almost certainly cause all sorts of flaming replies (bad
aussie pun), but I'm fed up with excuses ... it seems as if they simply don't
have a clue.

Phil

- ---------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU)
Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)
Designer, Standard Role Playing (PGD)

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 14:35:56 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Ships of the Interstellar Wars

Leroy William Lu Guatney writes:
>In my coverless edition, it says (excerpted, and re-formated on purpose):
> 
>   Page 23        Page 26
>                  Computers
>     Tonnage          Model    Ship   TL
>       D  4,000         3        D     9
>       E  5,000
>       F  6,000
>       G  7,000
>       H  8,000
>       J  9,000
>       K 10,000         4        K    10 (A)
>       L 20,000
>       M 30,000
>       N 40,000
>       P 50,000         5        P    11 (B)
>       Q 75,000
> 
> The relevant textual quotes are:
>   pg.28 "Computers...Ship size shows the hull tonnage code which requires
>          this computer model as a minimum; for example, a 10,000 ton ship
>          has hull code K, and requires at least a Model/4 computer be
>          installed. Tech level shows the minimum tech level required to
>          build the indicated computer."
>   pg.22 "Each specific tonnage level includes all values between it and
>          the next highest level stated. Thus, tonnage A includes all
>          tonnage code A includes all tonnages from 1,000 to 1,999 tons.
> 
> Who made the small error? <G>  BTW, you may notice from one of my earlier
> posts, before I read this one, that I am in the High Guard pantheon. <G>
> 
> Just for clarity, _the_ maximum size for a TL9 ship, Terran or not, is
> 4,999 tons.  With my own house rule, I drop that to 4,900 tons but that
> either value still does not allow for Terrans to mount Spinal mounts.

Going by the tables you quote the maximum ship the Terrans can build,
assuming for purposes of argument that their computer TL is identical to
their space TL (ie. 9), is one of 9999 Tons, since the smallest ship that
require a TL 10 computer is one of 10,000 T.

However, there is no evidence that the Terran computer TL was 9. I won't
press the point that Terra, today, in the Real Universe, is propably 
already making TL 11 or 12 computers, since I don't adhere to the theory
that the Traveller Universe is a carbon copy of the Real Universe. But
they could easily have. In fact, if they had spinal mounts (something I
don't recall if thay had during the 1IW) then they obviously was able to
build ships of a size to carry them.  

>Andrew, I enjoyed the mythical Early Terran Battleship, but let's have
>one that is legal.  I am sorry that I was behind, but as fate would have
>it, the exact first digest I started reading today was the one with
>this (your) note in it, and one of the last was your tech level 9 10KT
>Terran battleship.  

While a pure TL 9 10,000 T battleship is not legal under the CT rules, a
hybrid TL one is. And, for that matter, strictly speaking a pure TL 9
9,999 T battleship is legal.

>>First the minor error. You've misread the rule regarding ship size and
>>computers. The rule state that a ship of a certain size requires a certain
>>model of computer as a minimum. At TL 9 the best computer you can build is a
>>Model/3, at TL 11 its a Model/5. Now a 5,000T ship requires a Model/3 and a
>>10,000T requires a Model/4; a 50,000T ship requires a Model/5 and a 100,000T
>>ship requires a Model/6. Therefore the Terrans can build any ship smaller than
>>10,000T and the Vilani any ship smaller than 100,000T.
> 
> 
>I think what you are trying to say is that size D includes size E-J, which I
>do not agree with.

I didn't expect you to, but I hope that at a minimum you'll concede that the 
table can be interpreted the way Andrew and I suggests? (Btw. FYI, you are 
the first person I've heard of that interprets that table the way you do.)
 
>Then, given that the FIW was not too decisive, since the Vilani just have to
>keep coming back, they'll eventually capture all the Terran ships, repair
>the maneuver drives, and the only thing left for the Terrans to do is build
>more ships.  Hell, with Armor-11, the Vilani could start ramming the Terran
>ships--it just depends on how fast they build, or have accumulated the
>Ersha class.  They might be able to field 1:1 for Terran ships, and any
>Armor-11 ship would do, it wouldn't have to be the flagship. <G>

No doubt the Vilani could have beaten the Terrans if they had gotten their
act together, but the historical facts are that they didn't. To defeat
someone you need the means and the will (and skill) to apply the means.
Unless it is completely implausible that the Vilani did lack either one
or both, we have to accept such historical facts. It's only when such a
fact is completely implausible that we can question it. For example, if
the background stated that the Terrans attacked and conquered Dingir during
the 1IW, then we could compare the likely defenses of Dingir with the likely
offensive forces of the Terrans and grow sceptical. But all we know is that
the forces at the command of the Vilani viceroy didn't manage to conquer
Terra. There could be any number of reasons for that, many of them
political.



      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8
 
 

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 08:48:37 -0400
From: "Glenn Crawford" <glennc@nelvana.com>
Subject: ALL TORONTONIANS ON THE TML

As the message title says, 
Jester's Den (on Bloor between Spadina and Bathurst) has used Traveller stuff
I got Starship Operator's Manual, Vilani and Vargr, 101 Vehicles and Flaming
Eye for a total of $8
They still have 
World Builder's Handbook
Solomani and Aslan
Rebellion
Hard Times
COACC
as well as a whack o non-Traveller stuff, like T:2K and Harpoon (all rules +
10 books $20)

Go quickly or they will

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 13:49:00 +0100
From: Stewart Eyres <spe@astro.keele.ac.uk>
Subject: Clones in the 3rd imperium

Daniel Poulin said:

>I have read the small references in the Regency sourcebook on clones.
>I am interested to know if anyone has anything somewhere on the
>status of clones in the 3rd imperium?

In some of the stuff on robots, it is stated that Imperial law
protects all intelligent lifeforms (a proclimation of Cleon I, which
in part established the rights of aliens, clones and the like, but
also made robots property - siding with industrial concerns - although
presumably not those with interests in human cloning).

So, clones are people in there own right.  Growing clones for organ
transplants, or even brain transplants I seem to remember is illegal
(something in one of the Traveller Digests about cloning) - presumably
Cleon's proclimation doesn't quite cover this ("well, I cloned myself
without the brain, so clearly it isn't an *intelligent* lifeform...").

Related to this is Strephon's knighting of a pseudo-biological robot -
redefining the definition of an Imperial citizen.  This touches on a
wider point that Imperial law can be redefined by the Emperor often
without regard for precedent (although a sensible Emperor will
consider the acceptability of any changes to his subjects).

Back on track... Archduke Norris had a "true daughter", which is a
euphamism for a clone.  I think she was his heir.  This doesn't
necessarily mean that your clone is an heir like your children are;
high nobles can probably select their heirs, particularly if there are
no appropriate alternatives.  Of course, Norris didn't have to get his
decision confirmed by his Emperor.  I think in Arrival: Vengeance, or
maybe in Survival Margin, there is a quote from Strephon to the effect
"Seldrian [Norris' true daughter] was a good idea, a pity he doesn't
make an attractive woman; but Norris should really get an heir" which
I interpret as meaning that he didn't consider a clone to be an heir.

The Imperial region probably isn't/wasn't uniform in its attitudes (it
isn't in anything else).  The Delphi region went over to slavery
during the Rebellion - perhaps this was a throw back to old slavery
customs, including clones.  The Solomani Confederation includes the
Wuans, who clone lots of different types of human.  Given the Vilani
emphasis on heredity, they either (1) don't clone because of
tradition, or (2) give clones the rights of natural children (I'd
probably go for 1).

The Imperium as a whole appears to be relatively backwards in its
biotech - perhaps this is partially related to its Vilani heritage
(who were backwards in biotech because they came from a world with no
common biology).  The Solomani are especially advanced (it being
almost the Solomani equivalent of the Hiver's computer & robotics
expertise).

The Jonkeereen where genetically engineered by SuSAG to be suitable
for desert worlds - I think the first memebers of this human
subspecies were clones.  They have much the same rights as other
humans (ie. the right to be exploited and to fight their own corner).

Those are all the points relevant to clones I can think of right now.

Stewart Eyres <spe@astro.keele.ac.uk>

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 11:16:00 -0400
From: Bill Prankard <BPRANKARD@theiia.org>
Subject: Re:Sanity,Boredom and homicidal insanity

>Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 13:38:45 -0400
>From: "Glenn Crawford" <glennc@nelvana.com>
>Subject: Sanity

>Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 15:22:21 -0700 (PDT)
>From: Mark Ayers <mark@bbic.com>
>Subject: Re: Boredom and homicidal insanity in Traveller

>But here you are invoking GM fiat. I mean by this a system to determine
>MENTAL damage. Every game has rules for PHYSICAL damage. Traveller needs 
the
>mental stuff. LIke Generals, games designers dismiss mental casualties as
>not significant. There is an issue of DGP's Traveller's Digest that dealt
>with it, I would like something further to happen with that. Players will
>say "oh, my character only likes to read tech manuals and never takes leave
>and can only tolerate bland, really cheap food" in order to avoid spending
>any money. Mental disease is insidious.

>Players have no trouble taking penalties for physical damage because there
>are rules to cover it. They would probably feel the same if mental damage
>was covered too. This way, GMs do not feel like they have to keep reminding
>players to not behave sociopathically

Hmmm...Anyone for Cthulhu-Traveller?  Cthulhu, due to the nature of the 
game, includes mental health points(SAN) as important as hit points.  We all 
know that there is permanent SAN loss looking at jumpspace, and ghods forbid 
you come in contact with it!

I like this idea, we can have some fun coming up with SAN loss (what would 
constitute SAN anyway?  average of Endurance + Intellegence?)

Cabin Fever:  In jump, if the PC does not state that he is doing a "project" 
or other activity, have him make a san check(2d), -1DM each day.  Failure 
means the player get cabin feaver and sucumbs to a mild insanity(temp SAN 
loss of 1d6).  Exceptional Failure means the victim gets claustrophobia.

Watching jumpspace:  Staggering(4d) chack of SAN, failure results in 1d6 
PERMANENT SAN loss and 1 major insanity.

Watching a Hiver(great old one) do the macarena:  Imposible(5d) SAN check. 
 Failure means the victim goes right over the edge, looses all SAN and goes 
ape! :)

any other ways we can impliment SAN checks into Traveller?

 ----------------------
More SAN loss brought to the TML
Courtesy of Commander X and X-TEK
Makers of Cthulhu Chip Cookies:
"Insanely Delicious!"
 

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 17:28:15 +0100
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: Re: Kinetic Energy vs. Momentum

>Thanks, "friendly neighbourhood social scientist"!  :)
>
>Actually, what are the units for momentum?  Metre-grams per second?
>KE is measured in Joules.  What is momentum measured in (I was
>probably asleep in class when they mentioned that "mass*velocity"
>thing)?
>
>James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
>  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

As momentum is m*v it should be kilogram meters per second. A curious note
to space RPGers: as bullets normally have pretty small momentum all those
stupid zero-G recoil rules are way off. Take a 10 gram bullet flying at 300
m/s hitting an 80 kg guy with no blowthrough. Bullet momentum is 3 kgm/s,
momentum conservation gives the man the same momentum and thus we deduce
that he will get a speed of 3/80 = 0.0375 meters per second or about 4 cm
per second.


/Anders Backman
Aniware AB
anders.backman@aniware.se

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 09:14:53 -0600
From: Glenn Hoppe <starcity@sk.sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: <->

Michael D. Peters wrote:
> 
> Just a real quick note, I'm in the middle of reconstructing a major
> hardware crash in my PC, but I picked up FF&S2 and saw the infamous
> <->symbols. On showing them to my significant other (who works in the
> art/print realm) she laughed. It seems she's seen this happen before.
> Somewhere between IG and their printer they hae a software glitch the
> printer's typesetting program read the * and broke it into three parts <
> - >. According to her she ran into the same problem with one printer she
> deals with and has switched to a simple x for multiplication when
> dealing with him. So now we all calm down a bit. This time, at least, it
> wasn't IG's fault! Now the missing tables are another matter...
> Mike Peters

Oh, I think it's fair to assess some of the blame to IG.

I work in the print industry, too, and we would be remiss if we didn't
request a blueline (pre-production proof made from the final film that
will be used to produce the plates) and check that puppy over before
continuing. To make doubly sure the plates have been produced without
flaws, we also would have someone be there on press day, to look at a
finished copy as it rolls of the pressess.

I suspect that IG just contracts the pre-press work out, and lets them
handle it. I don't know if anyone at IG would even *be able to* discover
these sorts of flaws. It's a shame that one the actual authors wasn't
able to look over a pre-production proof.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 09:14:14 -0600
From: Glenn Hoppe <starcity@sk.sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: Universal Range Bands

Robert Eaglestone wrote:
> 
> Allright, don't ask me why, but I got to wondering if
> ranges could be classified under one code, and I came
> up with this:
> 
> UNIVERSAL RANGE BAND CODE
> 
> Code                   Range                            A.U.
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> 0                     0m - 3m                       Contact
> 1                     4m - 15m                      V. Close
> 2                    16m - 45m                      Close
> 3                    46m - 150m                     Medium
> 4                   151m - 450m                     Long
> 5                   451m - 1500m                    V. Long
> 6                  1501m - 10km                     Subregional
> 7                   11km - 30km                     Regional
> 8                   31km - 300km                    Subcontinental
> 9                  301km - 3000km                   Continental
> A                 3001km - 30,000km                 Orbital (to 0.002 A.U.)
> B               30,001km - 300,000km                Far Orbit (to 0.02 A.U.)
> C              300,001km - 150,000,000km            0.02 - 1.0    A.U.
> D          150,000,001km - 1,500,000,000km          1.0  - 10.0   A.U.
> E        1,500,000,001km - 15,000,000,000km        10.0  - 100    A.U.
> F       15,000,000,001km - 150,000,000,000km      100    - 1000   A.U.
> G      150,000,000,001km - 1,500,000,000,000km   1000    - 10000  A.U.
> 

I have one problem with this table: It's a bit too coarse for my taste.
Also, Range band C is *really* big. (factor of 500 instead of ten)

I posted a range table a while ago, that I was developing for my FUDGE
conversion, that used a consistant logarithmic scale. I'll dig it up.

> 
> The big glitch I see now is that it doesn't really include ORBITS
> in the code system... maybe I should try to do that to REALLY
> make it universal... hmmm... that might increase the table size
> over 10 bands, so maybe not.  Any suggestions?

Yep. Use a consistant, logarithmic scale. (Each band is the same
multiplication factor from start to finish. I used sqrt(10) (rounded to
3) as that made a factor of 10 between any *two* range bands. It works
out that traveller "standard" bands fit in, and at least the scale is
*consistant*. (unlike the way T4 range bands stand now)
 
> Why do this?  Mostly out of curiosity.  Ok?

It's also pretty neat and gearheadish. :)

I'll find my own bands and repost 'em for your edification.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 17:33:52 +0100
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: Re: KE

>There seems to be a proble distinguishing between energy and work. While I
>am not a physicist, I think this is the dif....
>
>A 10  gram slug moving at 1000m/s has 5000 Joules of energy but only does 10
>kg of work.
>The recoil and impact is based on work, damage is based on KE. In short, the
>slug can actually move 10 kg, but it can transfer, based on medium, much
>much more
>
>And then my train of thought got derailed and suffered a major chemical
>spill........

Right on the spot but the term work is normally used for energy or energy
diferences - use the term momentum instead for the
recoiling/knockbacking/shieldbashing physical phenomena.


/Anders Backman
Aniware AB
anders.backman@aniware.se

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 09:32:54 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: April Fool

At 09:52 PM 8/28/97 -0400, you wrote:
>>> I think TNE fans deserve a conclusion
>>>to their milleau.
>>
>>Empress Iolanthe (sp?) wakes up to see Strephon taking a shower...
>
>Actually, we did this in an "April' Fool" issue of Challenge...few people
>seemed to get it.

Wasn't it Lucan who woke after a real bender to see His Majesty scrubbing away?
- --

+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~+
|  Douglas E. Berry       dberry@hooked.net  |
|      http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/        |
|--------------------------------------------|
|  I can please only one person per day.     |
|    Today is not your day.                  |
|     Tomorrow isn't looking good either.    |
|      -motto of Dogbert's New Ruling Class  |
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~+

  

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1759
***********************************
Traveller-digest      Friday, August 29 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1760



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Sanity,Boredom and homicidal insanity
GLURBS
New CSC version uploaded
Announcing: IDEX Traveller Software Beta
Re: Clones in the 3rd imperium
Re: Kinetic Energy vs. Momentum
Re: HEPlaR fuel in FF&S2 was Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations
Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)
Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)
Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)
Re: Winded
Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations
Re: Sanity,Boredom and homicidal insanity
Re: <->
Re: Winded
Re: Beginnings v0.95beta (DOS) is out!
Re: Task Resolution

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 09:58:37 -0700
From: Evyn MacDude <wmacdude@Concentric.net>
Subject: Re: Sanity,Boredom and homicidal insanity

Bill Prankard wrote:

> Cabin Fever:  In jump, if the PC does not state that he is doing a "project"
> or other activity, have him make a san check(2d), -1DM each day.  Failure
> means the player get cabin feaver and sucumbs to a mild insanity(temp SAN
> loss of 1d6).  Exceptional Failure means the victim gets claustrophobia.

I seem to recall a adventure were "our Heros were" in the middle of a long journey,
Multiple Jumps back to back. The ships captain and I (playing the ship's doctor)
got in to a prank war that got very extreme. (rewiring ships systems) 
Another player got tired of it very quickly, she was playing a Zho Commando.
She tried to adjust us, we had more fun taking her mental modifications to
illogical extremes. She never did that again.
- -- 
Evyn,
Warleader of the Clan MacDude
Yuppie Hunter of the Forgotten Surf
	Fortalice Desertum
	AD. 1997

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 10:59:58 -0600
From: Glenn Hoppe <starcity@sk.sympatico.ca>
Subject: GLURBS

Glenn's Logarithmic Universal Range Band Scale
==============================================

A consistant, metric, and logarithmic scale to use in your Traveller
game. Posted a while back. Reposted in response to Robert Eaglestone's
recent post.

Cumbersome large meter values are nicely rounded to other convienient
real world units. May not exactly match Traveller bands, but comes close
enough for most people.

Formula: Range Band = 2 x log10(Distance in metres)  dn

Range band 0 may include distances <1 m or if you prefer, make a new -1
range band: subcontact (REALLY touching :) )


Range 	Distance	Units		Description
- -----   --------        -----           -----------
0	1-3		metres		Contact
1	3-10		metres		Very Short
2	10-30		metres		Short
3	30-100		metres		Medium
4	100-300		metres		Long
5	300-1000	metres		Very Long
6	1-3		kilometres	Extreme*
7	3-10		kilometres	Subregional*
8	10-30		kilometres	Regional
9	30-100		kilometres	Superregional* ?
10 (A)  100-300		kilometres	Subcontinental
11 (B)	300-1000	kilometres	Midcontinental* ?
12 (C)	1000-3000	kilometres	Continental
13 (D)	3000-10000	kilometres	Planetary
14 (E)	0.03-0.1	light-seconds	Orbital
15 (F)	0.1-0.3		light-seconds	Far-Orbit
16 (G)	0.3-1		light-seconds	
17 (H)	1-3		light-seconds	
18 (J)	3-10		light-seconds	
19 (K)	10-30		light-seconds	
20 (L)	30-100		light-seconds	
21 (M)	2-6.7		AU		Interplanetary
22 (N)	6.7-20		AU	
23 (P)	20-67		AU	
24 (Q)	67-200		AU	
25 (R)	200-670		AU	
26 (S)	670-2000	AU	
27 (T)	2000-6700	AU	
28 (U)	6700-20000	AU
29 (V)	3-10		milliparsecs	
30 (W)	10-30		milliparsecs	
31 (X)	30-100		milliparsecs	
32 (Y)	100-300		milliparsecs	
33 (Z)	300-1000	milliparsecs	
34	1-3		parsecs		Interstellar
35	3-10		parsecs	
36	10-30		parsecs	
.
.
53      3000-10000      megaparsecs	Universal

*my names selected for these bands. Any suggestions for band 9 & 11? The
provisionary names I stuck in suck.

Of course, the upper end of the scale may not come in handy in every
Traveller game, but I extended it just to show how Universal it is. :-P

It gives one a sense of scale of the universe when you consider that the
factor from band 13 to 33 (planetary to one parsec distance) is the same
as from 33 to 53, (1 parsec distance to the size of the universe). The
factor from RB-7 (0.3-1 millimeter) to RB13 planetary (3000-1000 km), is
also twenty. Interesting.

Note to Bruce Alan Macintosh: How would your sensor rules convert to
this scale?

------------------------------

Date: 29 Aug 1997 17:54:59 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: New CSC version uploaded

I've uploaded a new version of CSC (1.0.4b), an application that designs
Traveller vehicles using the system in the Central Supply Catalog.  This
version has the following improvements:

- - chassis G-rating now displayed in both description and exported files
- - user can now select a default text editor/word processor for exported files

As usual, it can be found at:

http://www.interlog.com/~dmci104/GamingClub/Traveller/software.html


Could someone please forward this announcement to the gdw-beta list?  I can't
seem to get subscribed there (my messages keep bouncing).  Thanks.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 13:21:54 -0500
From: "Andrew Akins" <igor@ames.net>
Subject: Announcing: IDEX Traveller Software Beta

I am ready to release version 0.1beta of IDEX, a package of computer
software that I have been writing for Traveller. If you are interested in
IDEX, or interested in being a beta test, please visit my IDEX web page at:

www.ames.net/igor/trav/IDEX/IDEXinfo.htm

It can also be found by visiting my general Traveller pages at:

www.ames.net/igor/trav/trav.htm

and browsing to the "Operations" area.

Thanks.

+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Andrew Akins                                                       |
| Home: igor@ames.net - http://www.ames.net/igor/                    |
| Work: andya@cms-gt.com - http://www.cms-gt.com/                    |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
| May your villages remain ignorant of tax collectors, and may your  |
| sons be many and ugly and strong and willing workers, and may your |
| daughters be few and beautiful and excellent providers of love     |
| gifts from eminent families that live very far away, and may your  |
| lives be blessed by the beauty that has touched mine.              |
|                    - Number Ten Ox, "Bridge of Birds"              |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 11:39:03 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: Re: Clones in the 3rd imperium

On Fri, 29 Aug 1997, Daniel Poulin wrote:

> OK people, let's see what can come up of that one.
> 
> I have read the small references in the Regency sourcebook on clones.  I am
> interested to know if anyone has anything somewhere on the status of clones
> in the 3rd imperium?
> 
 
They exist, but are officially illegal, or rather, they aren't illegal
_per se_, but they're treated as free individuals, and the uses _most_
clones are put to come under various other laws, such as slavery. 

Strephon allegedly had clones made of himself to 'stand' in when he needed
to be in two places at once, like be at and _not_ be at his assasination
;-) This however, leads to some interesting speculation regarding these
clones: Either he was cloned at or very near to birth, so his clone
appeared at or near his biological age, or the 3I has some means of
accellerating growth enormously. 

Of course the clones in question are just rumors, they might have been
robots, or out of work actors surgically or cosmetically altered to appear
to be him (probably the cheapest route) a la Double Star by RAH. 

Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 18:35:51 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: Kinetic Energy vs. Momentum

On Fri, 29 Aug 1997 17:28:15 +0100, Anders Backman wrote:

> >Thanks, "friendly neighbourhood social scientist"!  :)
> >
> >Actually, what are the units for momentum?  Metre-grams per second?
> >KE is measured in Joules.  What is momentum measured in (I was
> >probably asleep in class when they mentioned that "mass*velocity"
> >thing)?
> >
> >James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
> >  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"
> 
> As momentum is m*v it should be kilogram meters per second. A curious note
> to space RPGers: as bullets normally have pretty small momentum all those
> stupid zero-G recoil rules are way off. Take a 10 gram bullet flying at 300
> m/s hitting an 80 kg guy with no blowthrough. Bullet momentum is 3 kgm/s,
> momentum conservation gives the man the same momentum and thus we deduce
> that he will get a speed of 3/80 = 0.0375 meters per second or about 4 cm
> per second.

So if it is momentum that is conserved and not kinetic energy, would
it be fair to assume that the difference in calculated KE (between a
firearm and a projectile based on 'm' & v) was energy in a different
form (light, heat, etc.)?

James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 14:51:01 +0000
From: Tim Connors <tconnor@pop3.utoledo.edu>
Subject: Re: HEPlaR fuel in FF&S2 was Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations

At 10:57 PM 8/28/97 -0400, you wrote:
>John Macpherson wrote:
>>> tconnor@pop3.utoledo.edu (Tim Connors) said:
>
>>> For a 932 Td hull, I figured 81.55 kl of LHyd per G-turn (1/2 hour)
>>> from FF&S2.
>
>> You made a mistake somewhere here.  932 Td hull with an average 
>> density of 10 tonnes/Td is 9320 tonnes requiring 93200 kN thrust.
>
>In FF&S2 starships have an assumed density of 14tonnes/Td and not 10
>tonnes/Td like they did in FF&S.  This change in assumed density is why
>HEPlaR appears to be less efficient, when in reality HEPlaR is the same as it
>was in FF&S as John has pointed out earlier.  
>
>Chris Cox
>"If Fosters is Austrailian for beer, why does it come from Canada?"
>(chriscox@ix.netcom.com)
>The Draconis Cluster Traveller pages
>(http://users.aol.com/yanbeck/trav.htm)
>
	On page 11 of FF&S2, second paragraph from the bottom on the right hand
side, "one cubic meter of spacecraft normally requires 10kN of thrust per G
of acceleration desired." Thus a 932 Td (13048 cubic meters) Hull requires
130480 kN of thrust per G of acceleration.

	In FF&S, acceleration was only recalculated if the final design had a
density greater than 15 metric tons per Displacement ton so a density of 14
tonnes/Td would have been within that realm and should not have required
modification.


Tim Connors

Don't lose heart
     . . . someone might want to cut it out
           . . . and they'd like to avoid a lengthy search.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 11:10:26 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)

At 07:02 PM 8/28/97 -0700, you wrote:

>James Lindsay wrote:

>> Might I suggest an alternative that can be used, perhaps, as an
>> optional rule:
>> 
>> The combatants are allowed to expend _up_to_half_ their APs beginning
>> with the combatant with the HIGHEST AP total (they do not have to
>> expend any APs if they so choose).  Once the last combatant has had a
>> chance to expend APs (up to half of their total), the order of play
>> reverses.  Combatants now expend their remaining APs, beginning with
>> the individual with the LOWEST AP total.  This allows combatants with
>> superior AP totals to act first if they so choose, while still
>> allowing them to react to APs spent by their slower opponents.
> 
>Also, allow the combatants with the higher APs to use them to begin
>actions which may take the entire turn or even more than one turn
>to complete and provide them with the option of aborting such an
>action during the last half of the turn. Such an abort results in
>the loss of expended APs but allows the APs allocated to the original
>action to be assigned to subsequent actions.

I see that I'm going to have to be much clearer about APs and the turn
sequence.

Let's say you have 6AP (you are a klutz.)  Since you go first, you can
simply say "I'll pass" or somesuch, and sit tight.  Now, Eneri Wayne (21AP)
is moving, and comes by you.  You can *at that moment* decide to interfere
with his move/action.  For the sake of example, you decide to run away from
him.  This would require an intiative task.

You and Eneri would both roll to see who went first.  Let's say he won.  He
could then take whatever acton he desired (shot, grapple, move on, ignore
you) before you could make your move. If he decided to ignore you, and
continued on his way (paying AP for his move), you would be able to spend
your AP to scuttle off down the corridor after he was finished.  Of course,
once he ignored you, you could stay still, or whatever.

Also note that any other combatant within sight of this confrontation could
also jump on the bandwagon and roll for intiative.  A good rule of thumb is
to insist that everybody who is capable of intervening in a particular
event declare if they are going to before the dice start falling.

The only time that a combatant is locked into an action is once she has
spent the APs, or has declared a LTA.

Now, when you've reached a point where nobody has any APs remaining, or
everyone with APs has passed, then the turn is over, and you go to the
Update phase and figure out the results of the carnage. 

>I'd like to know what happens to a round which actually "blows through"
>a target (if it's in the rules, I've missed it). Does it have a chance
>of hitting someone/thing downrange? What are the odds and penetration
>damage potential? Admittedly, this adds complexity and, therefore, can
>increase the "roll-playing" at the cost of potentially boring players
>not taking an active part in being shot. Of course, I've never found
>_not_ being shot to be boring...

I suppose if a combatant is *directly* in line with the path of the shot,
you could allow a chance of a second hit (or third, or fourth...)  The
problem is, this is a matter of pure luck.. I'd leave it up to Referee's
discretion.

As a draft idea:  If a combatant is in the correct position, a round which
has blown through the primary target may hit the second combatant.  The
damage of the round is equal to the original damage of the weapon, less any
armor reduction from the primary target, the blowthrough number, and a
further reduction of one.

Example: A heavy MG round (Damage 6) hits an unarmored target.  a second
target is directly in line with the gun, and is ruled to be hit.  The
damage recieved by the second target is 6-3 (blowthrough)-1+ 2, less any
armor worn by the second target.

- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 11:42:15 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)

At 01:27 AM 8/29/97 GMT, you wrote:
>On Thu, 28 Aug 1997 09:28:55 -0700, Douglas E. Berry wrote:


>> I'll also make more explicit that *any combatant* with avalible AP can
>> attempt an Intiative task at any point.  This is why you hoard the things!
>
>So, people first announce how they are going to spend their APs (in
>order) and _then_ they carry them out (in order)?

See my other post on this subject.. I'll have a nice big explanation of the
intiative sequence in the update version, along with a complete combat
example (which will explain all the penguin references, I swear.)

>If this is true, I can see how this method would be more realistic by
>allowing slower players to try and attempt tasks before faster players
>but it does mean additional task rolls for initiative determination.
>It is also random compared to simply going in order of AP totals.

The intention was to make players of slower characters really think about
moving.  Most of the time, i've seen the lower AP type spend a great deal
of time slinking about, trying to set up ambushes, which is exactly the way
it really happens!


>> How about:  "The maximum range for any firearm is two range bands beyond
>> the printed effective range.  Aimed fire beyond that range is not possible
>> under any circumstance.  Example:  A pistol with an effective range of Very
>> Short would have a max range of Medium."
>
>Greg Porter couldn't have said it better :)

*blush*

>Perhaps use the existing DMs and Damage Multipliers for autofire and
>shotguns for the basic rules and use the more advanced rules as
>optional rules.  That way, skirmishes can be played out using either
>set of rules, depending on how fast the GM wants combat to flow.

Are you thinking of the rules in 3G3?

>> In one playtest, my wife's character (STR-6 Pistol-1 17AP)
>> was in a concealed position and fired one shot at a target at Very Short
>> range.  She spent 4AP for the action, plus *10* for aiming, raising her
>> target number from seven to seventeen!
>
>Might I humbly suggest a rule governing the maximum number of APs that
>may be used in a single aiming action?  Maybe limited by "2x the
>user's skill rating" or something like that...

When you get into the things that can lower your to-hit number.. allowing
someone to spend all her AP makes sense.  Remember, this was a case of a
person carefully aiming for about 5 seconds before taking the shot; that is
a long time in combat.  Many times during the playtests, we'd go rounds
with everybody firing at max ROF and not bothering to aim at all!

>> >> Blowthrough.

>> Rabbits are immune to lasers.  Don't ask.  
>
>What about Golfs, Beetles, and Vanagons?

Haven't covered those yet, but I can say with authority that 1969 VW
campers are indestructable.  I followed the Grateful Dead in one for a few
months.

>> You make a good point, but my research seems to indicate that the steam
>> around the wound will interfere with the beam itself.  I understand this is
>> a common problem in industrial applications of laser cutting.
>
>rEsEaRcH!!!  Exactly *WHAT* have you been doing with your free time,
>man!?!

I'd tell you, but then I'd have to kill you. :)

Reading the Army studies on laser weapons, actually.  That and speaking
with surgeons at Stanford about this topic.  (My doctors love me, how many
cancer patients show up for an appointment and ask "by the way, what would
happen if you hit a human with a packet of plama moving at several hundred
kph?")

>Bullets cause hydrostatic shock by causing the wound cavity to balloon
>outwards temporarily (ooch!) while lasers cause much more serious
>explosive damage (OOCH!).  IMHO, a laser would yield a much larger
>permanent wound cavity than a bullet.  But I'm not the one doing
>research in how steam around a laser wound disrupts the beam :)

Bullets also keyhole and fragment.  Wound dynamics are a bitch to model for
a game.  Probably the best job was done by Millennium's End.

But for TACS I'm trying to get the *tactical* end down.. This sis the part
that matters to the players.  The act of moving and shooting the pirates.
I can (and have) debated wound cavities, stopping power, and the hoary .45
vs. 9mm arguement for hours, but Traveller combat isn't the right place.

>The point is that the steam does absorb most of the remaining laser
>beam energy and that superheated steam persists in and around the
>target for at least a while.  Perhaps a 4d6 maximum damage rule for
>lasers? (running & ducking to avoid numerous small hurled objects)

Problem there is that blowthrough is based on target mass.

>> You want credit as a developer?
>
>Oh, yes please!  I'd love to see my name up in ligh-- I mean, "10 pt
>Times Roman" :)

It's Courier New at the moment, but you're in!
- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 10:52:08 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)

At 01:46 AM 8/29/97 GMT, you wrote:
>On Thu, 28 Aug 1997 19:02:30 -0700, David Smart wrote:
>
>> Anyone have Real World experience with this kind of sighting
>> arrangement?
>
>Doug does.  He's doing research involving shooting people with laser
>beams to determine how much the steam (produced by vapourised flesh)
>affects the beam itself :P

Actually, I was discussing lasers with my surgeon last time I was in
hospital.. turns out I had a surgical laser used on me a couple of years
back when they removed my spleen.  Seems that you get far less bleeding
sincve the laser seals the thousands of tiny blood vessels as it goes.

Not that this has anything to do with anything, just like to point out that
I'm probably the only TMLer who has been shot with a laser powerful enough
to burn flesh.
- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 11:45:42 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: Re: Winded

On Fri, 29 Aug 1997, Stewart Eyres wrote:

> Hi there
> 
> I've just read a story which might be related to the idea of being
> knocked about by bullets, etc.:
> 
> "A FORMER policeman survived a lightning strike yesterday because of
> his rubber flip-flops.
> 
> "David Jarvis, 54, was sent flying by the thunderbolt during one of the
> storms which marked the end of one of the hottest Augusts on record.
> 
> "Mr Jarvis was thrown 15 feet into the air before being dumped at the
> bottom of his drive."
> 			(Electronic Torygraph, Friday 29 August 1997)
> 
> Where is the momentum in a lightening bolt?  Clearly, the energy from
> the bolt had to escape some how, and was translated into a force, and
> so into momentum applied to David Jarvis, 54.

Wrongo! For an example of exactly _why_ that cop flew fifteen feet, see
the work of a (16th, 17th?) century Italian named Galvani, who discovered
that a dissected frog leg will twitch when an electric current is passed
through the muscles. The cop basically _twitched_ those fifteen feet.

It's relatively easy to experience this first hand...just touch an
improperly grounded electric stove and range hood at the same time...I was
unable to move my arms voluntarily, while every muscle twitched and
contracted. Not fun, not fun in the least, and considering that the
current went through my chest, I'm lucky I'm alive. My arms ached for
days.

Don't try this at home kiddies...

Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 15:21:48 +0000
From: Tim Connors <tconnor@pop3.utoledo.edu>
Subject: Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations

At 11:30 AM 8/28/97 -0400, you wrote:
>tconnor@pop3.utoledo.edu (Tim Connors) said:
>> >
>> >>However, FF&S2 HEPlaR has horrible fuel efficiency
>> >>compared to the old FF&S...  Its tough.
>>
>>         Looks like they missed by about 40%.
>> 
>>         For a 932 Td hull, I figured 81.55 kl of LHyd per G-turn (1/2 hour)
>> from FF&S2.
>
>	You made a mistake somewhere here.  932 Td hull with an average 
>density of 10 tonnes/Td is 9320 tonnes requiring 93200 kN thrust.
>
>	93200*.00125m^3/hr/kN = 116.5m^3/hr.  
>
>	For a half-hour (turn) 116.5/2=58.25 m^3/hr
>
	New book requires 10kN per cubic meter not 10 tonnes per TD thus
	130480 * .00125 m^3/hr/kN = 163.1 m^3/hr or 81.55 m^3/half-hr
	see page 11, below equation 1.

	Yes, usage formula is the same -- but different criteria are being applied
which result in a forty per cent increase in fuel requirement.


Tim Connors

Don't lose heart
     . . . someone might want to cut it out
           . . . and they'd like to avoid a lengthy search.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 11:48:03 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Sanity,Boredom and homicidal insanity

In mail you write:

> Hmmm...Anyone for Cthulhu-Traveller?  Cthulhu, due to the nature of the 
> game, includes mental health points(SAN) as important as hit points.  We all 
> know that there is permanent SAN loss looking at jumpspace, and ghods forbid 
> you come in contact with it!

This fits well with a totally insane idea that came to me as I was half
asleep in bed this morning.... Cross Traveller and AD&D via the
Spelljammer rules. This would be even weirder than the Space:1889 cross
someone once suggested.

Picture the players as they close on the strange sensor contact only to
find a wooden *ship* flying thru space with people walking on the deck!
:-)

You want SAN checks? If *that* doesn't require a SAN check, I don't
know what does!

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com	<--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com	<--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 12:00:46 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: <->

In mail you write:

> Just a real quick note, I'm in the middle of reconstructing a major
> hardware crash in my PC, but I picked up FF&S2 and saw the infamous
> <->symbols. On showing them to my significant other (who works in the
> art/print realm) she laughed. It seems she's seen this happen before.
> Somewhere between IG and their printer they hae a software glitch the
> printer's typesetting program read the * and broke it into three parts <
> - >. According to her she ran into the same problem with one printer she
> deals with and has switched to a simple x for multiplication when
> dealing with him. So now we all calm down a bit. This time, at least, it
> wasn't IG's fault! Now the missing tables are another matter...

Sorry, but it is *still* IG's fault. They didn't proof the galleys
(assuming they even had galleys!).

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 11:38:44 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Winded

In mail you write:

> "A FORMER policeman survived a lightning strike yesterday because of
> his rubber flip-flops.
>
> "David Jarvis, 54, was sent flying by the thunderbolt during one of the
> storms which marked the end of one of the hottest Augusts on record.
>
> "Mr Jarvis was thrown 15 feet into the air before being dumped at the
> bottom of his drive."
>                         (Electronic Torygraph, Friday 29 August 1997)
>
> Where is the momentum in a lightening bolt?  Clearly, the energy from
> the bolt had to escape some how, and was translated into a force, and
> so into momentum applied to David Jarvis, 54.  While the physics of
> the conversion of thunderbolt energy into Jarvis momentum is different
> in detail, surely the principle is valid?  That is, the energy of a
> bullet/shotgun pellets/etc. has to be dissipated some how, and not
> always enitirely by directly damaging the target.

Nope. You see, I am all too familiar with what sent Mr. Jarvis flying.
A lightning bolt is one heck of a lot of electrical current. Electrical
current applied to the human body causes muscular contractions. In the
case of large currents, *violent* contractions. (even to the point of
breaking bones due to opposing muscle groups "fighting")

I once accidentally put myself across the 500 volt winding of a TV
power transformer. Right hand on one lead left on the other. Next thing
I knew I was sitting on the floor 3 feet from the transformer. Which is
a neat trick, since I was sitting on the floor to begin with! (It takes
a lot more strength to throw a sitting person back 3 feet than a
standing person).

While being struck by a bullet can cause some muscle contractions and
the like, it's nothing like what even a moderate current (like a taser)
can do. 
  
- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 12:46:25 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Beginnings v0.95beta (DOS) is out!

..and once again, the sever is claiming this does not exist.

Doug.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 97 21:33 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

In-Reply-To: <970827095412_111609394@emout08.mail.aol.com>

> Those interested in the task debate should email me and request the file. It
> is an ascii file.

I suppose I really should see what I'm arguing about...
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1760
***********************************
Traveller-digest      Friday, August 29 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1761



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

RE: Sanity,Boredom and homicidal insanity
re: GLURBS
Re: Task Resolution
re: FFS2
Re: Heplar Fuel Consumption
Re: Winded
Re: Sanity,Boredom and homicidal insanity
....Judgement Day
[T97#1757] Deep Stations/Pocket Empires
Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)
Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)
Economics Questions
Re: Winded
Re: Kinetic Energy vs. Momentum
Gateway & Viruses

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 10:34:04 -0500
From: David Reed <david@techrefuge.com>
Subject: RE: Sanity,Boredom and homicidal insanity

On Friday, August 29, 1997 10:16, Bill Prankard wrote:

> >Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 13:38:45 -0400
> >From: "Glenn Crawford" <glennc@nelvana.com>
> >Subject: Sanity
>
> >Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 15:22:21 -0700 (PDT)
> >From: Mark Ayers <mark@bbic.com>
> >Subject: Re: Boredom and homicidal insanity in Traveller
[snip]

> Hmmm...Anyone for Cthulhu-Traveller?  Cthulhu, due to the nature of the
> game, includes mental health points(SAN) as important as hit points.  We
> all
> know that there is permanent SAN loss looking at jumpspace, and ghods
> forbid
> you come in contact with it!

Not quite in line with Cthulhu, but related to sanity are the alternate 
jump rules we play with in one campaign (which need to be overhauled), 
stolen in part from Drake's "Igniting the Reaches" books.  For every X 
amount of time spent in "transit", character's accumulate "mental fatigue" 
which reaches a threshold, based on the character's WILL (yes, we have 
different stats in Texas), and begins to generate various phobias, 
neurosis, psychoses, and general hard feelings between the crew.

The pilot campaign for this "transit drive" was in Milieu:TNE, and the 
troop of RCES (really!), mostly former marines, didn't make it to stop 
number one before the lieutenant of the Away Team (we call it ground team, 
but some said that this term annoyed someone else ;-) was taking swings at 
the force commander over lunch, something about the FrcCmdr ordering 
sedatives for certain marines, namely the lieutenant.  (Yeah, I said they 
needed to be overhauled...  The rules should've allowed them to get closer 
to the objective before they lost it; as it was they took a rest, and 
arrived in good shape.  Damn!)

Transit's a lot faster (a parsec per day sounded gallant), but more 
dangerous, and it gives us something to do while we're waiting to do 
something that the ref (moi?) failed to prepare for.  I think I missed the 
alternative drive discussion somewhere...  Anyone have coherent 
suggestions for making changes to this tech?

Next up:  Psionic Drive Technology and your Brain
______________________________________________________________________

David Reed           | All wickedness is weakness: that plea therefore
                     | With God or Man will gain thee no remission.
david@techrefuge.com |                -John Milton, "Samson Agonistes"
______________________________________________________________________

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 14:41:19 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: re: GLURBS

>A consistant, metric, and logarithmic scale to use in your Traveller
>game

When I was designing sensors for use in FFS2, I was told T4.1 would have a scale
with 5x10^n km range bands - 500, 5000, 50000, etc. Perhaps you should
adjust your range scale to match this? Since having only 5/50/500 is coarse,
I actually put in half range bands - 5/16/50/500/etc. 

Admittedly it's not as friendly as 3/10/30/100, but I gather it's what T4.1
is going to use - and it's what the sensors are scaled for (see the Definitve
Sensor Rules post...I'll reproduce a piece of the range scale here:)


Range:                                                          RANGE
km                      BL Hexes        T4 name T4.1 name       band
								number

<=500                                           regional        8
<=1,600                                                         8.5
<=5,000                                         continental     9
<=16,000                0                                       9.5
<=50,000                1-2                     planetary       10
<=160,000               3-5             VS                      10.5
<=500,000               6-16            S       far orbit       11
<=5,000,000             17-50           M                       12
<=16,000,000            51-160          L                       12.5
<=50,000,000            161-500                                 13
<=160,000,000   1 AU    501-1600                                13.5
<=500,000,000   3 AU                            interplanetary  14
<=1,600,000,000 10 AU                                           14.5
<=5,000,000,000 30 AU                           outsystem       15
<=16,000,000,000  100 AU                                        15.5
<=50,000,000,000  300 AU                        oort            16
<=500,000,000,000 3000 AU                                       17

Bruce

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 14:36:06 -0700
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

Mon, 25 Aug 1997 03:26:49 +0000, "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>

>Wrong again, David.

You seem to have an affinity for trying label those who
disagree with you as "wrong".

>It all started when I made a plea to Marc, and
>in that plea I described a man having a heart attack.  I asked if it
>made sense for the paramedic (Edu-10, Medical-1) to operate versus
>the surgeon (Edu-6, Medical-4).

You can talk about "how it started" all you want.  But what
the poll actually measures (to the degree that such an
unscientific poll can measure anything at all), is what
people are asked.  They were _not_ asked about stats vs
skills.  Otherwise I would never have been counted among
the 85.

>The TML exploded, and withing 24 hours, there were 80 people who
>wrote in to Marc's challenge.

Yes, there was some counting of posts before the poll.  What
was interesting was that there was a lot of selective interpreting
in that count.  Any discussion of flaws was immediately counted
by you as support.  You had me down as one of those people who
"exploded" and I certainly don't agreee with you on tasks v
skill.  Regardless of what number you can legitimately count,
the claim that the game has a "problem" when it doesn't handling
skill vs stats as you want to can hardly be said to be generally
agreed.

I was left on the poll that followed
afterward because the person wh conducted _explicitly_
state that he was just counting people who felt there
was _any_ thing that might be changed.

>Get your facts straight.

I do.  I just don't apply the filter to them that you do.
In spite of claims the contrary, you have trouble accepting
that everone didn't jump on your alternate task system and
don't immediately adhere to your view on skill vs stat.
You attempts at revisionist history won't change the fact
that you view is only one opinion on the matter.

______________________________
summers@alum.mit.edu

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 14:47:29 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: re: FFS2

>        New book requires 10kN per cubic meter not 10 tonnes per TD thus

Oops. That breaks all the published designs slightly - very-to-fairly bad.
I think it should be considered to be errata and fixed...

Bruce

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 17:46:54 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Macpherson <john35@wharton.upenn.edu>
Subject: Re: Heplar Fuel Consumption

Tim Connors <tconnor@pop3.utoledo.edu> said:
> 	On page 11 of FF&S2, second paragraph from the bottom on the right hand
> side, "one cubic meter of spacecraft normally requires 10kN of thrust per G
> of acceleration desired." Thus a 932 Td (13048 cubic meters) Hull requires
> 130480 kN of thrust per G of acceleration.
> 
> 	In FF&S, acceleration was only recalculated if the final design had a
> density greater than 15 metric tons per Displacement ton so a density of 14
> tonnes/Td would have been within that realm and should not have required
> modification.

	Its not the modification point that's changed, it's the 
_baseline_.  Actually, this change is quite appropriate for T-plate 
ships, which tend to be rather dense, but for Heplar ships its a real 
problem since they carry so much very not dense fuel.  If you can, I 
reccommend calculating required thrust based on the ship's actual mass 
rather than the "1 tonne/m^3" rule of thumb.  For heplar ships, this 
should bring performance back to FF&S1 ranges.

- -JM

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 22:24:50 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: Winded

On Fri, 29 Aug 1997 11:38:44 PST, Leonard Erickson wrote:

> In mail you write:
> 
> > "A FORMER policeman survived a lightning strike yesterday because of
> > his rubber flip-flops.
> >
> > "David Jarvis, 54, was sent flying by the thunderbolt during one of the
> > storms which marked the end of one of the hottest Augusts on record.
> >
> > "Mr Jarvis was thrown 15 feet into the air before being dumped at the
> > bottom of his drive."
> >                         (Electronic Torygraph, Friday 29 August 1997)
> >
> > Where is the momentum in a lightening bolt?  Clearly, the energy from
> > the bolt had to escape some how, and was translated into a force, and
> > so into momentum applied to David Jarvis, 54.  While the physics of
> > the conversion of thunderbolt energy into Jarvis momentum is different
> > in detail, surely the principle is valid?  That is, the energy of a
> > bullet/shotgun pellets/etc. has to be dissipated some how, and not
> > always enitirely by directly damaging the target.
> 
> Nope. You see, I am all too familiar with what sent Mr. Jarvis flying.
> A lightning bolt is one heck of a lot of electrical current. Electrical
> current applied to the human body causes muscular contractions. In the
> case of large currents, *violent* contractions. (even to the point of
> breaking bones due to opposing muscle groups "fighting")

So if I strap a car battery and a step-up transformer on my back and
mount perimeter sensors all over my body, I could leap out of the way
of typical Vancouver drivers?  Cool!

> I once accidentally put myself across the 500 volt winding of a TV
> power transformer. Right hand on one lead left on the other. Next thing
> I knew I was sitting on the floor 3 feet from the transformer. Which is
> a neat trick, since I was sitting on the floor to begin with! (It takes
> a lot more strength to throw a sitting person back 3 feet than a
> standing person).

So the cartoons got it wrong, then? :P

> While being struck by a bullet can cause some muscle contractions and
> the like, it's nothing like what even a moderate current (like a taser)
> can do. 

All kidding aside, does this translate to mean that taser injuries are
often more painful than bullet injuries at the moment the injury takes
place (ignoring the searing lead and the sight of one's own blood)?

James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 15:46:36 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: Re: Sanity,Boredom and homicidal insanity

On Fri, 29 Aug 1997, Leonard Erickson wrote:
> 
> This fits well with a totally insane idea that came to me as I was half
> asleep in bed this morning.... Cross Traveller and AD&D via the
> Spelljammer rules. This would be even weirder than the Space:1889 cross
> someone once suggested.
> 

No need to go that far...just stick a planet or two full of Hokas in your
universe...that'll make you need SAN checks ;-)

Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 16:30:49 -0700
From: Edward Fok <efok@ni.net>
Subject: ...Judgement Day

Not really related to this list, but I'm sure the interest is there...

Happy Judgement Day!

Looks like they blew up the right company...

(reference: Terminator 2)

The emailer former known as "Caffeine Achiever"  :)

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 00:14:04 GMT
From: jeff.zeitlin@earth.execnet.com (Jeff Zeitlin)
Subject: [T97#1757] Deep Stations/Pocket Empires

On Thu, 28 Aug 1997 19:17:01 -0400, SemoFetus@aol.com wrote

>>My "gut feel" for this would be:  If you find a rogue planet
>>(i.e., rock or rock/ice ball of size 1 or better), costs to
>>construct a deep station on it would be twice the normal costs
>>for a starport of equivalent capabilities. (i.e., to build a
>>(much of post snipped)
>
>In your message you mention close-structures.  What, exactly, is a close
>structure?

As a kind of starship (which is how I was using it) I don't know
if they're canonical, but:

Consider the USS Enterprise from any version of Star Trek.  That
would be an open structure.  A close structure would be similar,
in that it's lots of blocky or blobby pieces, but they'd all be
stuck together, rather than sticking out on pylons all over the
place.

>I do not have the Pocket Empires book.  What is an RU (I would assume it
>means Resource Unit?) "worth"?

Call it roughly 5,000,000,000 Imperial Credits.

- --=20
Jeff Zeitlin
jeff.zeitlin@earth.execnet.com

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 00:12:41 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)

On Fri, 29 Aug 1997 11:10:26 -0700, Douglas E. Berry wrote:

> I see that I'm going to have to be much clearer about APs and the turn
> sequence.
> 
> Let's say you have 6AP (you are a klutz.)  Since you go first, you can
> simply say "I'll pass" or somesuch, and sit tight.  Now, Eneri Wayne (21AP)
> is moving, and comes by you.  You can *at that moment* decide to interfere
> with his move/action.  For the sake of example, you decide to run away from
> him.  This would require an intiative task.
> 
> You and Eneri would both roll to see who went first.  Let's say he won.  He
> could then take whatever acton he desired (shot, grapple, move on, ignore
> you) before you could make your move. If he decided to ignore you, and
> continued on his way (paying AP for his move), you would be able to spend
> your AP to scuttle off down the corridor after he was finished.  Of course,
> once he ignored you, you could stay still, or whatever.

So, if Mr. Klutz (6AP-- a *truly* pathetic individual) decides to use
_all_ of his APs to run away (a total of 3 metres), Mr. Wayne (21AP)
wants to make an aimed shot at him (4 AP) before Mr. Klutz gets away,
and Mr. Klutz wins the initiative roll, does the shot take place after
Mr. Klutz has run only 2 metres (ie: after 4 AP, the number of APs
necessary for an aimed shot) or after he completes his "move" action?

This sounds like it can get quite complicated with a group of a dozen
combatants.  You are creating a situation where at least a dozen
initiative tests might be needed (even more if all involved have large
numbers of APs and they are planning to do multiple feats with them.

On a related note, would throwing a 5kg+ object count as a LTA for Mr.
Klutz?


James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 00:12:43 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)

On Fri, 29 Aug 1997 11:42:15 -0700, Douglas E. Berry wrote:

> At 01:27 AM 8/29/97 GMT, you wrote:
> 
> >So, people first announce how they are going to spend their APs (in
> >order) and _then_ they carry them out (in order)?
> 
> See my other post on this subject.. I'll have a nice big explanation of the
> intiative sequence in the update version, along with a complete combat
> example (which will explain all the penguin references, I swear.)

After reviewing the consolidated AP list, I think-- IMHO-- that you
may need to either increase the number of APs a character possesses or
reduce a few of the AP costs a bit.

For example, the average DEX-7 INT-7 Tactics-0 individual could only
move 7m (14 APs) in a six-second combat round without resorting to
sprinting.  The average person can _walk_ that fast-- never mind trot
or jog.  Jumping down more than 2m shouldn't really take 8 AP to
complete, *unless* the person failed the task test for landing.

Additionally, the "Standing up (from seat)" action may want to be
rewritten to include "or crouch" and a "Sit/Crouch" action be included
as well (there's gotta be *some* kind of posture between standing and
being completely prone).

> >Perhaps use the existing DMs and Damage Multipliers for autofire and
> >shotguns for the basic rules and use the more advanced rules as
> >optional rules.
> 
> Are you thinking of the rules in 3G3?

Yes.

> >> In one playtest, my wife's character (STR-6 Pistol-1 17AP)
> >> was in a concealed position and fired one shot at a target at Very Short
> >> range.  She spent 4AP for the action, plus *10* for aiming, raising her
> >> target number from seven to seventeen!
> >
> >Might I humbly suggest a rule governing the maximum number of APs that
> >may be used in a single aiming action?  Maybe limited by "2x the
> >user's skill rating" or something like that...
> 
> When you get into the things that can lower your to-hit number.. allowing
> someone to spend all her AP makes sense.  Remember, this was a case of a
> person carefully aiming for about 5 seconds before taking the shot; that is
> a long time in combat.  Many times during the playtests, we'd go rounds
> with everybody firing at max ROF and not bothering to aim at all!

The problem is that you run into situations with people with
negligible skill shooting like sharpshooters.

A character's skill contributes to the likelihood of achieving a hit.
This skill is natural and does not constitute taking any extra time to
"aim".  Therefore, if you and I picked up identical rifles and began
firing at a difficult target _without_ bothering to "aim", the current
combat system gives you a distinct edge.  So would real life.

Skilled shooters will naturally be able to aim their weapons better
than novices, especially at longer ranges (elevation, leading the
target, etc.).  Since you have defined "spending APs to achieve higher
target numbers" as "aiming", neither of us can compensate for range--
as an example-- without spending additional APs.  Again, with your
sniping experience, you will be able to spend-spend-spend your APs to
improve your chances greatly.  Me, OTOH, wouldn't have a clue as to
how far I should led a target or how that little flip-up range finder
metal thingie works.  Therefore, I should be limited as to how many
APs I can spend towards improving my chance to hit (or more correctly,
how "efficient" my AP expenditures are when used to improve my chances
to hit :)

> >> >> Blowthrough.
> 
> >> Rabbits are immune to lasers.  Don't ask.  
> >
> >What about Golfs, Beetles, and Vanagons?
> 
> Haven't covered those yet, but I can say with authority that 1969 VW
> campers are indestructable.  I followed the Grateful Dead in one for a few
> months.

It might be fun to include an "official" rules that "rabbits are
immune to lasers", just to see how many people actually enforce it :P

> (My doctors love me, how many
> cancer patients show up for an appointment and ask "by the way, what would
> happen if you hit a human with a packet of plama moving at several hundred
> kph?")

Even a litre of blood plasma would hurt at several hundred km/h.

> Wound dynamics are a bitch to model for
> a game.  Probably the best job was done by Millennium's End.

Is ME made by "Leading Edge Games"?  If so, I have experience with a
watered down damage system of their "Phoenix Command" rules (a la
"Aliens" and "Living Steel").  "The Babylon Project" also has
excellent damage & recovery rules.

> I can (and have) debated wound cavities, stopping power, and the hoary .45
> vs. 9mm arguement for hours, but Traveller combat isn't the right place.

What would /your/ one-word answer to the .45 vs. 9mm debate be, OOC?

> >The point is that the steam does absorb most of the remaining laser
> >beam energy and that superheated steam persists in and around the
> >target for at least a while.  Perhaps a 4d6 maximum damage rule for
> >lasers? (running & ducking to avoid numerous small hurled objects)
> 
> Problem there is that blowthrough is based on target mass.

Oh, well....  You *do* know that this topic *will* come up again when
more TMLers look at future drafts? :)

Looking forward to future drafts,

James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 16:55:02
From: Ian or Katts <ianw@zed.com.au>
Subject: Economics Questions

Yeah ...

(1) How do we write an economics system to reflect competition (eg everybody
else is also shipping goods between the Industrial and Agricultural planets
that are right next door), but is nevertheless usuable in a game ?

(2) Given core/periphery theory, we can predict that the Imperial Core (Sylea
in M0, Sylea + Sector Capitals) will have a net trade deficit with the
provinces
, because of the amount of net invisibles <repatriated profits etc>. How can
we quantify this ?

(3) What is the Imperial Ruling Rate of Interest, and how can we justify it 
given the economic development rules in PE ?

(4) Why do any free traders buy their ships ... it is simpler and cheaper to
lease the space on someone else's ships for your speculative cargo, and frees
up that 10% deposit for speculative cargo.

(5) What is the value per ton (or displacement ton) of the staples of interstellar
commerce ? And what *are* the staples of interstellar commerce ? (Given Cr1000
per displacement ton per parsec, you can ship Scout Beer, cost Cr2/liter 28 parsecs
before the shipping cost doubles the price of the beer ...)

That should do for now :)

Ian Whitchurch

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 17:28:20 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Winded

In mail you write:

> It's relatively easy to experience this first hand...just touch an
> improperly grounded electric stove and range hood at the same time...I was
> unable to move my arms voluntarily, while every muscle twitched and
> contracted. Not fun, not fun in the least, and considering that the
> current went through my chest, I'm lucky I'm alive. My arms ached for
> days.

Bruce,

Thank you *very* much for posting that. You reminded me of something
that happened a few months back and had slipped my mind. I got a minor
zap from my range hood. Now that I'm reminded, I'm writing a work order
for the landlord!

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 17:36:18 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Kinetic Energy vs. Momentum

In mail you write:

> On Fri, 29 Aug 1997 17:28:15 +0100, Anders Backman wrote:
>
>> >Thanks, "friendly neighbourhood social scientist"!  :)
>> >
>> >Actually, what are the units for momentum?  Metre-grams per second?
>> >KE is measured in Joules.  What is momentum measured in (I was
>> >probably asleep in class when they mentioned that "mass*velocity"
>> >thing)?
>> >
>> >James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
>> >  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"
>> 
>> As momentum is m*v it should be kilogram meters per second. A curious note
>> to space RPGers: as bullets normally have pretty small momentum all those
>> stupid zero-G recoil rules are way off. Take a 10 gram bullet flying at 300
>> m/s hitting an 80 kg guy with no blowthrough. Bullet momentum is 3 kgm/s,
>> momentum conservation gives the man the same momentum and thus we deduce
>> that he will get a speed of 3/80 = 0.0375 meters per second or about 4 cm
>> per second.
>
> So if it is momentum that is conserved and not kinetic energy, would
> it be fair to assume that the difference in calculated KE (between a
> firearm and a projectile based on 'm' & v) was energy in a different
> form (light, heat, etc.)?

*Both* momentum and KE are conserved. But as I got forcefully reminded
a few months back, Momentum is a *vector* quantity (ie it has both a
magnitude *and* a direction), but KE is a scalar (it only has a
magnitude). 

So since the bullet + gun system starts with a momentum of zero, it has
to end with one of zero. This is done by applying equal but opposite
momenta to the gun and bullet. 

Likewise, the system of bullet + target has a fixed momentum. So when
the bullet hits, the system must still have the same momentum. Thus the
momentum of the bullet gets distributed over the mass of bullet +
target, giving a new (and much lower) velocity.

Now as for *energy*, the gun + bullet system starts out with 0 KE, but
a certain amount of chemical energy in the bullet. When fired the
chemical energy is released, converting to KE of the bullet, thermal
energy in the escaping gases, and thermal energy in the gun (ie the gun
gets hotter). The starting and ending amounts of energy are equal.

The bullet + target system has a certain amount of KE in the bullet. At
normal speeds, the bullet's KE gets converted into "mechanical" energy
as the bullet and target deform. Hypervelocity projectiles convert the
KE to so much "mechanical" energy that the bullet and some of the
target turn into plasma (and then into heat, light, etc).

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 01:03:59 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: Gateway & Viruses

Given that "canon" says (or strongly implies) that the only place that  really
has advanced medical knowledge is Terra, and that the Vilani do not -- simply
because they are completely unrelated (in an evolutionary sense) to anything on
their planet *and* that "canon-heads" have used this for years to "prove" that
the way the Terrans won the Interstellar War was because of biowarfare
(intentional or not) and that Vilani society was decimated after the war by the
supposedly deliberate release of the "Plague of Duskir" by the terrans, then how
about "Children of a Future Age" adventure in "Gateway"?

In it we have a virus so lethal to humans that it will wipe out an entire
planetary population of at least a million (which is too small to support the
tech level they evidently possess, but that's another matter) within three weeks
*yet* it can be effectively researched and "cured" by the players with their
advanced tech in a few days. Umm, does anyone else find this to be inexcusable
*if* one accepts "canon" (which, admittedly, I've always found dubious and
argued against anyway).

We are told that the source of the disease, the Sevalids (a pseudo-insect) is
"native to Arishiir" (page #21) and that the disease evolved as a defence
against any animal that ate it (page #20) ... which, of course, means any
*LOCAL* animal.

Now, if we believe the extreme "canon heads" there is *no way* that this disease
could affect humans in the way it does. The local animals are native to the
planet and therefore are unrelated evolutionarily to humans -- therefore, so the
canon-heads would have us believe, it could *never* affect humans! So, either
the adventure premise is garbage *or* the canon-heads are wrong, and the Vilani
had multiple -- probably dozens, even hundreds, of similar encounters with
diseases prior to contact with the Terrans.

Then, of course, with the right technology (from Sylea, where it is difficult to
see that there would be much of an ongoing scientific ability with Terran
diseases, given that the diseases we humans are most vulnerable to are carried
generally by animal populations that, we can reasonably assume, are rare
anywhere outside Terra) the Players are able to identify the disease, determine
the "cure" and rescue the whole planetary population, with local low tech
assistance being just as vital, in a few days. Sorry, if dealing with Viruses
that are non-Terran in origin was *that* simple, then surely the Vilani would
have had no trouble dealing with Terran diseases.

And there's the problem that *no* disease is *ever* going to be as lethal, or as
infectious, or as quick spreading as the virus in the adventure. The most lethal
realistic biowarfare agent that was in development by the Russians and Americans
was, evidently, Anthrax, and that was nowhere near 100% infectious, nowhere near
100% lethal, and was not capable of spreading far by itself.

We are told that the virus in this adventure has been transformed into an
aerosol form -- OK, seems fair on the face of it, but it is fairly easy to
defend against such a virus ... you do what they did in Oz during the Spanish
=46lu epidemic, you restrict travel between population centers, you force all
people wishing to appear in public to wear gauze masks, and you close all public
places such as Movie Theaters, Churches etc.

The displayed population level is only 6, or between 1 and ten nine million
people, yet the Tech Level is supposedly 9, or equivalent to the 1990's. I doubt
that such a small population could support that TL ... and anyway, the TL of
transport displayed is far lower. The quickest way, for example, to get to the
Jungles where the insect is found is by spaceship -- yet a TL9 culture would
have some sort of military or civil SST that could do it as fast.

So even *spreading* the disease isn't going to be very fast -- as there seems to
be a) no existince fast transport net, b) the small population will be too
spread out to be 100% affected and c) the virus has such a short incubation
period that it couldn't spread 100% through the populace anyway.

Now, I'm as happy as the next guy to (as I think John W Campbell used to say)
"grant the gadget and go", but *either* we must regard Gateway as contradicting
the canon-heads *or* we must regard the interpretation of the canon-heads as
being wrong. There is really no middle course.

Personally, I'd argue for the latter -- but I'm sure the canon-heads will= argue
for the former rather than admit they might possibly be wrong (and, of course,
*i* could <never> be wrong :,>

(Flame retardant underwear *on*)

Phil
- ---------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU)
Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)
Designer, Standard Role Playing (PGD)

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1761
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Saturday, August 30 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1762



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

re: GLURBS
Re: Task Resolution
Why I'm (probably) ditching T4
Re: <->
Re: Kinetic Energy vs. Momentum
Traveller player wanted in Ottawa
Re: Universal Range Bands
task draft chapter
FFS2 questions.
Re: Kinetic Energy vs. Momentum
Re: Task Resolution
Revamped Web Pages
Re: Universal Range Bands
Re: Kinetic Energy vs. Momentum
Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations
Re: Gateway & Viruses
Re: Sanity
Re: Pocket Empires JavaScript
Re: Gateway & Viruses (long)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 97 19:22:20 -0600
From: Glenn Hoppe <starcity@sk.sympatico.ca>
Subject: re: GLURBS

On 1997-08-29 15:41, Bruce Alan Macintosh <bmac@astro.ucla.edu> posted 
the following:

>Admittedly it's not as friendly as 3/10/30/100, but I gather it's what T4.1
>is going to use - and it's what the sensors are scaled for (see the Definitve
>Sensor Rules post...I'll reproduce a piece of the range scale here:)

But I want a friendly scale! ;-> 

I don't like the 5x10^n scale because:

It doesn't scale up well from close range combat (1.6-5 m? 5-16 m, etc.) 
Awkward.
At space combat ranges, it doesn't convert well to light-seconds.
BL and BR hexes are scaled at .1 light second, doesn't mesh as well with 
that.

I guess my real question is: Is there an easy way to convert your sensor 
rules to use a different scale? I'm not overly concerned that results 
match exactly, I'm just wondering if a type x sensor could be easily 
rated on another scale. I'm hoping it could, since the 30/100 progression 
is 2x the 16/50 progression.


I guess it's a disadvantage that my scale has is incompatible with T4.1 
(or CT & MT, I guess). But it is compatible with TNE. Funny how little 
decisions like what scale to use stick in my craw. It seems that some of 
the good decisions TNE made are being ignored in favour of the old. How 
come combat ranges don't mesh with sensor ranges in a uninterrupted, 
consistant continuum? If FF&S2 is built upon FF&S1, why not use TNE's 
scale? I'm baffled. Where's the elegance? <wanders off, muttering to self>

- -- 
===== Glenn Hoppe =====\ /--- MailTo:jumpspace@geocities.com ----
\ . . Enter Jumpspace --X-> http://www.geocities.com/Area51/8275 \
 ----------------------/ \========== Eschew Obfuscation ==========

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 01:44:23 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

On Fri, 29 Aug 1997 14:36:06 -0700, David P. Summers wrote:

> Mon, 25 Aug 1997 03:26:49 +0000, "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
> 
> >Wrong again, David.
> 
> You seem to have an affinity for trying label those who
> disagree with you as "wrong".

And you seem to have an affinity for taking everything waaaaay too
personally.  Not everything written in email is a personal attack.
IIRC, it was you that started the personal attacks in the first place
(to which Ken responded with his "Why must you always be a butt"
comment).

Perhaps he should have used the word "incorrect" instead of "wrong".
You, OTOH, could have considered what he probably meant, not jumped
down his throat, twisting his choice of words for your own arguments'
sake.

> >It all started when I made a plea to Marc, 
> 
> You can talk about "how it started" all you want.  But what
> the poll actually measures (to the degree that such an
> unscientific poll can measure anything at all), is what
> people are asked.  They were _not_ asked about stats vs
> skills.  Otherwise I would never have been counted among
> the 85.

But didn't you ask during one of your previous posts how this
discussion on alternate task systems came into being?

FYI, there were actually *two* polls carried out.  The first was the
total number of replies to Marc's challenge.  Marc said he would
consider changes if he got 50 replies.  There were over 80 by the time
people found out the target of 50 had been surpassed.  The other
poll-- carried out by Volker Greimann-- was one regarding which task
system TMLers would prefer in T4.1 (T4 as is, T4.1, KBv2.0, MT, or
something else).

Both polls proved that a significant number of people receiving TML
had an interest in changing the system.  Additionally, the two task
systems that did treat skill levels with more impact than stat
levels-- KBv2.0 and MT-- accounted for a significant number of the
votes.  So at the time, not only were TMLers interested in a change,
but many of them were interested in a system that preferred "Edu-6,
Medical-4" to "Edu-10, Medical-1".  And unless you survey every
customer at every game store in the world, the TML poll results are
the next best thing to knowing what people want.

> >The TML exploded, and withing 24 hours, there were 80 people who
> >wrote in to Marc's challenge.
> 
> Yes, there was some counting of posts before the poll.  What
> was interesting was that there was a lot of selective interpreting
> in that count.  Any discussion of flaws was immediately counted
> by you as support.

This only makes sense.  Perceived "flaws" in the current system were
naturally "support" for changes.

> You had me down as one of those people who
> "exploded" and I certainly don't agreee with you on tasks v
> skill.  Regardless of what number you can legitimately count,
> the claim that the game has a "problem" when it doesn't handling
> skill vs stats as you want to can hardly be said to be generally
> agreed.

I'm not sure if Volker is still on the list but perhaps you can ask
him to send you the final results of the poll *he* was involved in.
Ken's poll, OTOH, only counted votes towards Marc Miller's challenge.

> >Get your facts straight.
> 
> I do.  I just don't apply the filter to them that you do.

Yes you do.  While Ken may be slightly biased towards changing the
current T4 task system (something that he feels KBv2.0 has succeeded
in doing-- in the most part), you seem to be biased away from anything
Ken has to say.  Different filter, same distortion.

> In spite of claims the contrary, you have trouble accepting
> that everone didn't jump on your alternate task system and
> don't immediately adhere to your view on skill vs stat.
> You attempts at revisionist history won't change the fact
> that you view is only one opinion on the matter.

Mr. Bearden may be "uniquely passionate" about the future of
Traveller, but at least he is making his voice heard.  Granted,
sometimes he does go overboard-- but he has also admitted to this and
apologized!

You, OTOH, seem to have a personal grudge against him.  Ever since Ken
resumed posting to the list a week or so ago, you have followed up
nearly all of his postings with one of your own aimed at belittling
him.  That type of behaviour belongs in private mail, not here so
everyone can watch you two exchange personal attacks.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 22:20:38 +0000 ()
From: kraehe@bakunin.hb.north.de (Michael Koehne)
Subject: Why I'm (probably) ditching T4

Moin Phillip McGregor,

> The level of proofreading displayed in the damn thing displays nothing  less than
> *either* contempt for the buying public *or* a complete lack of even the most
> minimal level of ability.

	Like you they have several software problems (the <-> at exampe)
	and no time of profreading. eg. use use a mailer called "Forte
	Agent 1.5/32.451" and your mailer destroyed your mail by encoding
	it "quoted-printable", now when I'm quoting your mail. Its looking
	bad. Of course you hav'nt proofread your mail in the UUCP spooler
	so you did'nt saw what happend with your mail.

	Similars happend with T4 material also. ;-(

	As a personal advise for IG:

	You are publishing a SCIENCE(fiction) roleplaying game, so
	cope with science publishers. Define a TeX, Roff or SGML
	style and enforce authors to use it.

	e.G if your are writing for Springer Heidelberg, you have
	to use LaTeX and their style, if you are writing for O'Reilly
	you can also use Roff. They know why they constrain authors
	to use professional software, and not M$ hobby software.
- -- 
	kraehe@bakunin.north.de			human.is-bremen.de/~kraehe
		  " ceterum censeo MSDOS esse delendam "

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 22:01:01 -0500 (CDT)
From: Joseph "Chepe" Lockett <jlockett@io.com>
Subject: Re: <->

Quoth Michael D. Peters:
> ...I picked up FF&S2 and saw the infamous <-> symbols. On showing them
> to my significant other (who works in the art/print realm) she laughed.
> It seems she's seen this happen before.  Somewhere between IG and their
> printer they had a software glitch....

And here I figured they were just showing their B5 fannishness by
littering the manuscript with ASCII jumpgates....  :-)

- ----------------------------*------------------------*------------------------
 Joseph L. "Chepe" Lockett  |"Nullum magnum ingenium | GURPS fan, Amiga user,
http://www.io.com/~jlockett | sine mixtura dementiae | Shakespearean scholar,
  Email: jlockett@io.com    | fuit." -- Seneca       | actor and director.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 22:19:16 -0500 (CDT)
From: Joseph "Chepe" Lockett <jlockett@io.com>
Subject: Re: Kinetic Energy vs. Momentum

Quoth Anders Backman:
> to space RPGers: as bullets normally have pretty small momentum all those
> stupid zero-G recoil rules are way off. Take a 10 gram bullet flying at 300
> m/s hitting an 80 kg guy with no blowthrough. Bullet momentum is 3 kgm/s,
> momentum conservation gives the man the same momentum and thus we deduce
> that he will get a speed of 3/80 = 0.0375 meters per second or about 4 cm
> per second.

Not bad if it converts entirely to linear motion (i.e. if you fire from,
or are hit directly at, your center of mass).  But it's the rotations from
off-center forces that will throw you out of control.

- ----------------------------*------------------------*------------------------
 Joseph L. "Chepe" Lockett  |"Nullum magnum ingenium | GURPS fan, Amiga user,
http://www.io.com/~jlockett | sine mixtura dementiae | Shakespearean scholar,
  Email: jlockett@io.com    | fuit." -- Seneca       | actor and director.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 23:24:32 -0400
From: "Dan" <pould@netcom.ca>
Subject: Traveller player wanted in Ottawa

Hi there people,

One of my player is leaving the group for a few months.  I would like to
know if there is any other Traveller player in Ottawa interested in joining
a group?

Daniel Poulin
pould@netcom.ca

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 23:31:45 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Universal Range Bands

In a message dated 97-08-29 00:01:15 EDT, you write:

<< 
 UNIVERSAL RANGE BAND CODE


UNIVERSAL RANGE BAND CODE


Range	Min	Name		Ls	AU		
0	0 m	Contact		
1	5 m	Vshort		
2	50 m	Short		
3	150 m	Medium		
4	500 m	Long		
5	1,000 m	Vlong		
6	5,000 m	Distant / Boarding	
7	50 km	Vdistant	
8	500 km	Regional	
9	5,000 km	Continental	
A	50,000 km	Planetary	
B	500,000 km	FarOrbit	
C	5,000,000 km	Extreme Orbit	
D	1 AU	Interplanetary	
E	10 AU	System	
F	100 AU	Oort	
G	1,000 AU	Deep Space	
H	1 ly	Light Year
I	1 pc	Parsec
J	10 pc	Subsector
K	50 pc	Sector


What I am interested in is this: How long does it take to travel (constant
acceleration to midpoint, instantaneous turnaround, constant acceleration to
endpoint) at a specific G for each of the space ranges (8-E)?

Range	1G	2G	3G	4G	5G	6G	10G	20G
8
9
A
B
C
D
E	


Marc

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 23:31:50 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: task draft chapter

The final draft for the Task chapter is finally ready. It addresses

task formats
many examples.

When Easy Tasks Are Hard:=20
Tasks On The Fly
DEFAULT SKILLS
SPECIAL TYPES OF TASKS
Cooperative, Opposed, and Uncertain tasks, and Actions.
	Tasks Without Skill.
	Tasks With Skill Only.=20
	Tasks With Optional Skill.=20
	Multiple Skill Tasks.
	Special Cases:=20
	Training, Practice, and Rehearsal.=20
SPECTACULAR RESULTS
DURATION
	Ignoring Duration:
	Including Duration:=20
	Hasty Tasks:
	Cautious:

SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS
	Jack of All Trades:=20
	Divided Attention:=20
	Reactions:=20
	Consequences.

WORKING WITH TASKS
	Don=92t overdo pre-defined tasks.=20
	The Role Of The Referee:=20

CREATING TASKS.
	1. Express the Task Phrase.=20
	2. Express the Task Statement.=20
	3. Express The Task Comments.=20

Deciding On Difficulty Levels
AN UNDERSTANDING OF TASKS
TASKS IN ACTION

The draft is available by request: email to

FarFuture@aol.com

Marc

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 20:42:32 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: FFS2 questions.

1.  In the particle accelerator and meson design sequences, is the weight
of the tunnel in kg or tons?

2. In the meson sequence what is the correct formula for determining
intensity?   Is it DE/(Effective Range/Range)^2 like for PAs?  If not, what
is it?

Thanks.
- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 06:13:08 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: Kinetic Energy vs. Momentum

On Fri, 29 Aug 1997 17:36:18 PST, Leonard Erickson wrote:

> In mail you write:
> 
> > So if it is momentum that is conserved and not kinetic energy, would
> > it be fair to assume that the difference in calculated KE (between a
> > firearm and a projectile based on 'm' & v) was energy in a different
> > form (light, heat, etc.)?
> 
> *Both* momentum and KE are conserved. But as I got forcefully reminded
> a few months back, Momentum is a *vector* quantity (ie it has both a
> magnitude *and* a direction), but KE is a scalar (it only has a
> magnitude). 

You mean that _energy_ is conserved, not necessarily in the form of
*kinetic* energy. (I think)

So, if we have a 4.0 g bullet with a velocity of 950 m/s (5.56mm), it
has 1805 J of kinetic energy and 3.8 Nm worth of momentum.  A 5.0 kg
M-16 rifle would therefore have the same momentum due to conservation
laws, which would translate into a backwards velocity of 0.76 m/s for
the rifle.

From the above numbers we have deduced that the rifle now has a
backwards velocity of 0.76 m/s.  Now, if one tries to calculate the KE
of the rifle using the velocity determined from the momentum formula,
we end up with a much lower KE value than that of the bullet... 1.4 J!
Can the remaining kinetic energy (1803.6 J) _really_ end up as thermal
energy in the weapon mass and propellent gasses?  What's up?

Or am I doing something terribly wrong and deserve a good spanking?

James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 01:42:48 +0000
From: Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

David P. Summers wrote:

> Yes, there was some counting of posts before the poll.  What
> was interesting was that there was a lot of selective interpreting
> in that count.  Any discussion of flaws was immediately counted
> by you as support.  

Exactly.  And it was support.  If you would read the posts before you
spout off, you would have read (what was it, two posts ago?) that I said
that several people were vocal about wanting a change in the T4 task
system.

But, I also said, and you seem to conveniently forget this, that we
couldn't agree on which way to fix the problem.

Now, you have a problem reading the real meaning in my e-mails, so I'm
going to take it nice and slow for you.

Are you ready?

SEVERAL people agree that the T4 task system should have stats and
skills attribute the same to the success of a task throw,

BUT, there has been no consensus on how to get that fixed--and this
includes KBv2.0.

Are you getting that?  Can you read?  I am telling you that just because
people agree that the T4 task system needs to be fixed, they do not
universally agree that KBv2.0 is the answer.

I hope that is not too hard for you to comprehend.

Now, that shouldn't be too hard for you to take in and understand before
you regurgitate and twist my words, is it?

Kenneth.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 15:11:29 +0800
From: Michael Bailey <mickb@opera.iinet.net.au>
Subject: Revamped Web Pages

I'm in the process of revamping my Traveller Web Pages, and could use a
little feedback.  Point your browser to

http://www.iinet.net.au/~mickb/Traveller/trav_splash.html

And let me know if you have any difficulties.  Any comments on load times,
tastefullness/lack thereof of the graphics, problems with specific browsers
would be appreciated.

I'm starting to migrate my old pages over, and anticipate switching to the
new pages in a few days.


Thanks for your time,


Michael Bailey
mickb@opera.iinet.net.au
				pillock-at-large and proud supporter of the Chelsea FC and Fremantle
AFL Clubs!

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 07:21:45 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: Universal Range Bands

On Fri, 29 Aug 1997 23:31:45 -0400 (EDT), CardSharks@aol.com wrote:

> What I am interested in is this: How long does it take to travel (constant
> acceleration to midpoint, instantaneous turnaround, constant acceleration to
> endpoint) at a specific G for each of the space ranges (8-E)?

If you mean, how long does it take to travel from Range Class "zero"
to the following ranges:

Range   1G      2G      3G      4G      5G      6G      10G     20G

  8    7.45m   5.27m   4.30m   3.73m   3.33m   3.04m   2.36m   1.67m
  9    23.4m   16.7m   13.6m   11.8m   10.5m   9.62m   7.45m   5.27m
  A    1.24h   52.3m   43.0m   37.3m   33.3m   30.4m   23.6m   16.7m
  B    3.93h   2.78h   2.27h   1.96h   1.76h   1.60h   1.24h   52.7m
  C    12.4h   8.78h   7.17h   6.21h   5.56h   5.07h   3.93h   2.78h
  D    2.83d   2.00d   1.64d   1.42d   1.27d   1.16d   21.5h   15.2h
  E	  8.96d   6.33d   5.18d   4.48d   4.01d   3.66d   2.83d   2.00d

and for those Oort Cloud refuellings...

  F    28.3d   20.0d   16.4d   14.2d   12.7d   11.6d   8.96d   6.34d



James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 97 14:22 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: Kinetic Energy vs. Momentum

In-Reply-To: <34112b24.51973920@mail.direct.ca>

> >  Kinetic Energy = .5*Mass*(Velocity)^2
> >  Momentum = Mass*Velocity
> >  
> Actually, what are the units for momentum?  Metre-grams per second?
> KE is measured in Joules.  What is momentum measured in (I was
> probably asleep in class when they mentioned that "mass*velocity"
> thing)?

*kilo*gram-metres per second.
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 09:24:27 -0400 (EDT)
From: XatoKuom@aol.com
Subject: Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations

In a message dated 97-08-30 07:59:07 EDT, you write:

<< At the temps that far away from a star, you can
 >store hydrogen as a *solid*. >>

I thought that solid, ie. "metallic" hydrogen could only be created under
conditions of immense pressure akin to those in the interior of a gas giant.
 The temperatures found even at these stellar distances "might" allow for
LHyd, but I don't think so.  IIRC ambient temperature of the universe,
amazing concept that that is, lies around 7-8 Kelvin whilst LHyd is approx. 4
Kelvin.

Cool ideas, though.  Read the "Gripping Hand" by Pournelle and Niven.  The
Moties use the properties of metallic hydrogen to launch a ship magnetically
then use said material as fuel.

Scott Quigg(XatoKuom@aol.com)
In Navajo, "Kemo Sabe" means soggy shrub!

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 05:24:10 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Re: Gateway & Viruses

Phillip McGregor wrote

[snips throughout]

> Given that "canon" says (or strongly implies) that the only place that really
> has advanced medical knowledge is Terra, and that the Vilani do not -- simply
> because they are completely unrelated (in an evolutionary sense) to anything on
> their planet then how about "Children of a Future Age" adventure in "Gateway"?
> 
> In it we have a virus so lethal to humans that it will wipe out an entire
> planetary population of at least a million  within three weeks
> *yet* it can be effectively researched and "cured" by the players with their
> advanced tech in a few days. Umm, does anyone else find this to be inexcusable
> *if* one accepts "canon" (which, admittedly, I've always found dubious and
> argued against anyway).
> 
> We are told that the source of the disease, the Sevalids (a pseudo-insect) is
> "native to Arishiir" (page #21) and that the disease evolved as a defence
> against any animal that ate it (page #20) ... which, of course, means any
> *LOCAL* animal.
> 
> Now, if we believe the extreme "canon heads" there is *no way* that this disease
> could affect humans in the way it does. The local animals are native to the
> planet and therefore are unrelated evolutionarily to humans -- therefore, so the
> canon-heads would have us believe, it could *never* affect humans! So, either
> the adventure premise is garbage *or* the canon-heads are wrong, and the Vilani
> had multiple -- probably dozens, even hundreds, of similar encounters with
> diseases prior to contact with the Terrans.

There is a much simpler explanation:

The life on Vland is very unlike the life on Earth (as stated in
numerous Traveller soures, most noteably Villani & Vargr.

The life on Arishiir on the other hand may or may not be very unlike the
life on Earth.  Gateway states that the life on Arishiir _is_
sufficiently like the life on Earth that at least this disease can & has
spread to humans.

It is not intrinsically improbable that life on different planets will
have different degrees of similarity to life on Earth.

> Now, I'm as happy as the next guy to (as I think John W Campbell used to say)
> "grant the gadget and go", but *either* we must regard Gateway as contradicting
> the canon-heads *or* we must regard the interpretation of the canon-heads as
> being wrong. There is really no middle course.

I do not see Gateway as perfect but I respectfully do not see the
contradiction you see.  Different planets can and will have life with
different degrees of similarity to Earth life.

>

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 09:37:15 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Sanity

I have always liked the Cthulhu concept of gradual degradation of sanity as
the character learns more and more about forbidden lore. But do we want
Scouts going gradually insane as they explore new worlds?

Cracking mentally under the strain of interstellar exploration just doesn't
fit the Traveller ideal. James Jamison, INTROM Captain (Captain in the
Intersterstellar Navy The Rule Of Man) leads his squadron to head off a
Vilani battle fleet, but the strain of being outnumbered is too much. He
cracks at a crucial time. Terra loses. Its just not a really great adventure.

Marc

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 10:59:22 -0400
From: "Peter L. Berghold" <peterb@cyber-wizard.com>
Subject: Re: Pocket Empires JavaScript

Robert Eaglestone wrote:
> 
> I wrote a little JavaScript proglet to compute a lot of
> the administratia in Pocket Empires.  It's 7.5k, so I
> won't post it here;  however, since I don't have my own
> web page anymore, where do y'all think it should go?
> 
> Is there a page out there that manages all the little
> Traveller proglets out there?
> 

I am (yet again!) in the process of rebuilding my pages, so now would be
a good time to add stuff...


- -- 
PGP Fingerprint = D6 74 56 8E FB 52 4E DD  5C 3F 32 FE AE 1F 1C D0

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%% Peter L. Berghold -- Unix Hacker at Large                          %%
%% TCG -- MIS Department       PHONE: (908) 392-2722                  %%
%% berghold@tcg.com  (work Email) peterb@cyber-wizard.com (play Email)%%
%% "Those who fail to learn from history are condemned to repeat it"  %%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 01:26:55 +1200
From: Andrew Moffatt-Vallance <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Gateway & Viruses (long)

>Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 01:03:59 GMT
>From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
>Subject: Gateway & Viruses

>Given that "canon" says (or strongly implies) that the only place that really
>has advanced medical knowledge is Terra, and that the Vilani do not -- simply
>because they are completely unrelated (in an evolutionary sense) to anything on
>their planet *and* that "canon-heads" have used this for years to "prove" that
>the way the Terrans won the Interstellar War was because of biowarfare
>(intentional or not) and that Vilani society was decimated after the war by the
>supposedly deliberate release of the "Plague of Duskir" by the terrans, then how
>about "Children of a Future Age" adventure in "Gateway"?

The problem with the Vilani was not that they were unrelated to Vland's ecosytem,
but that they were fundimentally incompatible with that ecosystem. More on this
later.

>In it we have a virus so lethal to humans that it will wipe out an entire
>planetary population of at least a million (which is too small to support the
>tech level they evidently possess, but that's another matter) within three weeks
>*yet* it can be effectively researched and "cured" by the players with their
>advanced tech in a few days. Umm, does anyone else find this to be inexcusable
>*if* one accepts "canon" (which, admittedly, I've always found dubious and
>argued against anyway).

>We are told that the source of the disease, the Sevalids (a pseudo-insect) is
>"native to Arishiir" (page #21) and that the disease evolved as a defence
>against any animal that ate it (page #20) ... which, of course, means any
>*LOCAL* animal.

>Now, if we believe the extreme "canon heads" there is *no way* that this disease
>could affect humans in the way it does. The local animals are native to the
>planet and therefore are unrelated evolutionarily to humans -- therefore, so the
>canon-heads would have us believe, it could *never* affect humans! So, either
>the adventure premise is garbage *or* the canon-heads are wrong, and the Vilani
>had multiple -- probably dozens, even hundreds, of similar encounters with
>diseases prior to contact with the Terrans.

You've misinterperated why the Vilani were vulnerable. The problem was not that
the Vilani evoloved on a world with an ecosystem unrelated to humans, but on a
world with an ecosystem incompatible with humans; unrelated does not automatically
equal incompatible. Indeed one of the basic unspoken premises of Traveller is that
many ecosystems are compatible. If you spend a while to think on it, a compatible
virus from an evolutionarily unrelated ecosystem can be both lethal and virulent.
The human population has no natural immunity, having never encountered the virus
or any of its relatives; thus no natural selection has occured and the population
is forced to rely on genetic "dumb luck".

However back to the Vilani. The problem they had with Terran diseases has four distinct aspects to it.
Firstly, the Vilani have spent the past 300,000 years on a world with an ecosystem
which is fundimentally incompatible with human biochemistry. It's not that the
ecosystem is unrelated, but that it's incompatible. As a result the Vilani have
spent the best part of the past 300,000 years with no threat to or need for their
immunoresponse system. One of the things about evolution is that there is a strong
tendency towards "use it or lose it", ie if a function is no longer neccessary
their is a tendancy towards losing that function. Now 300,000 years is not enough
time to lose such a basic function, but it is enough time to see it weakened or diluted noticably.
Secondly, again due to spending 300,000 years with out facing any risk of infection,
the Vilani failed to develop the neccessary medical technology. When they moved
into space, the undoubtedly did encounter many diseases which could infect them;
however it would appear that the Vilani responded to these threats by quarantine.
basically put, not only was Terran medical tech very good, Vilani medical tech was
very very bad.
Thirdly, the nature of Vilani culture made them even more vulnerable. The Vilani
lived in very close proximity to one another, sharing many facilities in common
(eg eating, bathing etc.) and living in hostel like accommodations. This makes
implimenting the basic precautions neccessary to halt the spread of infection much
much harder.
Fourthly, the very nature of the pathogens the Vilani faced from the Terrans is
fundimentally different to anything they would have encountered before. Every
bacteria and virus the Vilani would have encountered before the Terrans would have
been opportunistic organisms. These organisms would not have evoloved to infect
humans, but just happen to have the capacity by fluke. Most opportunistic
infections are not very lethal or virilent (there are exceptions, Ebola is an
opportunistic infection). However, the Terrans carry with them many viruses and
bacteria specifically evolved to target humans. The difference is that
opportunistic infections will tend to be localised (occuring when humans stumble
into the diseases life cycle); with the diseases the Terrans bring, humans are
an intergral part of the diseases life cycle.

>Then, of course, with the right technology (from Sylea, where it is difficult to
>see that there would be much of an ongoing scientific ability with Terran
>diseases, given that the diseases we humans are most vulnerable to are carried
>generally by animal populations that, we can reasonably assume, are rare
>anywhere outside Terra)

Here on Terra, most of the most lethal diseases don't have animal vectors
(Pneumonic plague, Cholora, Small Pox, Thypoid, Tuberculosis etc.). Plus the
diseases which caused the Plague of Duskir were not the big killers, they were
things like Influenza, the Common Cold, Chicken Pox, Measles, Mumps etc.

>the Players are able to identify the disease, determine
>the "cure" and rescue the whole planetary population, with local low tech
>assistance being just as vital, in a few days. Sorry, if dealing with Viruses
>that are non-Terran in origin was *that* simple, then surely the Vilani would
>have had no trouble dealing with Terran diseases.

Assuming that the Vilani understood the concept of vaccination and antibodies,
which in turn requires an understanding of the immunioresponse system. And since
the Vilani had no mechanism to trigger their immunioresponse system on Vland, it
would not seem unreasonable to assume that they did not.

>And there's the problem that *no* disease is *ever* going to be as lethal, or as
>infectious, or as quick spreading as the virus in the adventure. The most lethal
>realistic biowarfare agent that was in development by the Russians and Americans
>was, evidently, Anthrax, and that was nowhere near 100% infectious, nowhere near
>100% lethal, and was not capable of spreading far by itself.

Sorry the most lethal biowar agent experimented with was botulism (botulinal
toxin A to be precise if memory serves). It does have a lethality of close to
100%. You should read the Stockholm Peace Research Institutes report on
chemical and biological warfare to see just how nasty some of the pathogens
experimented with are (they managed to find a strain of Rabbit Fever
[Francisella tularensis] with a mortality rate of 60%). Also antrax was found
to be very infectous, just you needed exposure to a high number of bacteria
(around 20,000 spores), but thats only twice the exposure required for
Pnuemonic Plague. Oh and by the way, pulmonary anthrax is close to 100% fatal.
As to the virus in Gateway, consider Pnuemonic Plague, Incubation period 3-4
days, followed by a fever lasting 3-4 days. If untreated mortality is 90-100%;
yes diseases can be that virulent and that fast.

>We are told that the virus in this adventure has been transformed into an
>aerosol form -- OK, seems fair on the face of it, but it is fairly easy to
>defend against such a virus ... you do what they did in Oz during the Spanish
>Flu epidemic, you restrict travel between population centers, you force all
>people wishing to appear in public to wear gauze masks, and you close all public
>places such as Movie Theaters, Churches etc.

>The displayed population level is only 6, or between 1 and ten nine million
>people, yet the Tech Level is supposedly 9, or equivalent to the 1990's. I doubt
>that such a small population could support that TL ... and anyway, the TL of
>transport displayed is far lower. The quickest way, for example, to get to the
>Jungles where the insect is found is by spaceship -- yet a TL9 culture would
>have some sort of military or civil SST that could do it as fast.

Why do you doubt that 1-9 million people could support a TL 9 culture? It seems
a sufficent population to mantain an indstrial production base. However having
TL 9 does not mean that you have all the gadgets you would associate with it.
At 1-9 million people, they probably don't need an SST (assuming that the SST
could land in the middle of the jungle in question).

>So even *spreading* the disease isn't going to be very fast -- as there seems to
>be a) no existince fast transport net, b) the small population will be too
>spread out to be 100% affected and c) the virus has such a short incubation
>period that it couldn't spread 100% through the populace anyway.

Well the virus was released by a meglomanicial madman. I can't see any reason
why he would limit himself to just one release site. It wouldn't take too much
planning to ensure that the entire world was covered in a timely fashion. Take
the world's land area of 148.5 million km^2 (out of 209.2 million km^2), spread
say 1000 canisters of virus, thats 148,500 km^2 per canister. Assume the madman
has done his work and the virus can last a respectable period outside a host and
its quite within the realms of possibility.

>Now, I'm as happy as the next guy to (as I think John W Campbell used to say)
>"grant the gadget and go", but *either* we must regard Gateway as contradicting
>the canon-heads *or* we must regard the interpretation of the canon-heads as
>being wrong. There is really no middle course.

>Personally, I'd argue for the latter -- but I'm sure the canon-heads will argue
>for the former rather than admit they might possibly be wrong (and, of course,
>*i* could <never> be wrong :,>

>(Flame retardant underwear *on*)

Actually I don't see either option as being neccessary. Gateway is believable
(farfetched perhaps) and the Vilani were vulnerable to Terran diseases due to
the fact that they evolved amongst an incompatible ecosystem.

  Andrew etc.
    a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz

****************************************************************************
The longest distance between two points is with children.
****************************************************************************

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1762
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Saturday, August 30 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1763



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

re: GLURBS
Re: Kinetic Energy vs. Momentum
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1755
Re: Sanity,Boredom and homicidal insanity
Re: Universal Range Bands
Re: Universal Range Bands
Re: Gateway & Viruses
Re: Sanity
Re: Sanity
Re: Winded
Re: 0-G combat comments
Re: Sanity
re: GLURBS
Re: Boredom and homicidal insanity in Traveller
More CSC designed vehicles 2: Firefly ad Dragonfly recon craft
Re: Kinetic Energy etc....
Ship Missions

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 16:24:36 +0100
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: re: GLURBS

>I actually put in half range bands - 5/16/50/500/etc.

 When doing logs please use 5/15/50/150 instead (note the same but easier
to remember. Use:
1/10/100/1000 or
1/3/10/30/100 or
1.5/5/15/50/150 or
1/2/5/10/20/50/100 or
1/1.5/2/3/5/7/10/15/20/30

these are well established logscales with easy to remember values.

Backman the logmaster!


/Anders Backman
Aniware AB
anders.backman@aniware.se

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 16:21:09 +0100
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: Re: Kinetic Energy vs. Momentum

>Not bad if it converts entirely to linear motion (i.e. if you fire from,
>or are hit directly at, your center of mass).  But it's the rotations from
>off-center forces that will throw you out of control.

Yes if hit off-center you'll start spinning really really slowly so if
you're unconscious your aim will start wandering but for conscious guys no
big deal (esp compared to the shock/arms trashing etc you'd do when hit by
the bullet. I'd say recoil normally doesn't matter in zero-G. Swinging
bastard swords etc is another matter entirely. Also note that it is pretty
hard to dodge anything in zero-G.


/Anders Backman
Aniware AB
anders.backman@aniware.se

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 10:39:43 -0400 (EDT)
From: Larry Hadley <lhadley@peterboro.net>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1755

On Thu, 28 Aug 1997, "RFXn" <mlaakso@utu.fi> wrote:

> Subject: Re: Winded

> 	Better load that SKS with softnose rounds; a full-metal jacket rifle 
> round punches through almost any kevlar vest at 100 meters, let alone 
> 1 meter! More likely, the rifle used was either a .22 look-alike, or 
> fired underpowered, handloaded rounds. The video is supposed to 
> _sell_ body armor, remember. :)

   Worse, the 5.45mm rounds used by Soviet .22-type weapons are steel
penetrators; they have a steel needle core inside the lead bullet that
will go through a car and still have enough energy to seriously injure
someone.

   Almost certainly, they were using handloads or low-power (rimfire)
lookalikes. I don't know of _any_ ballistic protection that will stop
full-powered centerfire rounds from a rifle.

- -- DLH                                 lhadley@peterboro.net

http://text.peterboro.net/~lhadley/Profile.html

  "Fight to fly, fly to fight, fight to win." - TOPGUN motto.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 01:17:41 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Sanity,Boredom and homicidal insanity

In mail you write:

> On Fri, 29 Aug 1997, Leonard Erickson wrote:
>> 
>> This fits well with a totally insane idea that came to me as I was half
>> asleep in bed this morning.... Cross Traveller and AD&D via the
>> Spelljammer rules. This would be even weirder than the Space:1889 cross
>> someone once suggested.
>
> No need to go that far...just stick a planet or two full of Hokas in your
> universe...that'll make you need SAN checks ;-)

I'm an *old* fan of the Hokas. :-)

Actually, what I've always wanted to do was put Mesklin in the
Traveller universe. Picture fighter pilots who take about 1/16th the
space a human takes, and consider 200g to be "comfortable". Sure,
drives to get anywhere *near* that acceleration are hideously
expensive. But it'd be worth the cost in the first fight. 

And picture the look on the faces of the players.... :-)

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 01:42:11 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Universal Range Bands

In mail you write:

I'll have a detailed answer for you next message, but before I go off
and do the calculations, I need to let you know that you've got some
major gaps in your range codes:

> UNIVERSAL RANGE BAND CODE
>
>
> Range   Min     Name            Ls      AU              
> C       5,000,000 km    Extreme Orbit   
> D       1 AU    Interplanetary  

An AU is 150,000,000 km. So that makes a step of *30* in there. I think
a range of 50,000,000 km belongs in there. Since you later go from
light year to parsec (a step of 3.26), I think it's reasonable to have
one here. I think it makes the ranges "flow" better.

> G       1,000 AU        Deep Space      
> H       1 ly    Light Year

A light year is about 63,000 AU. So there should be a step of 10,000 AU
in here. Otherwise you have a jump of 63, which is rather large.

> What I am interested in is this: How long does it take to travel (constant
> acceleration to midpoint, instantaneous turnaround, constant acceleration to
> endpoint) at a specific G for each of the space ranges (8-E)?

Do be aware that relativity is going to rear its ugly head on some of
these. I'll try to dig up the formula to do it "right". If not, I'll
just mark the times that are going to be off.

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 05:02:47 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Universal Range Bands

In mail, traveller@MPGN.COM writes:

> What I am interested in is this: How long does it take to travel (constant
> acceleration to midpoint, instantaneous turnaround, constant acceleration to
> endpoint) at a specific G for each of the space ranges (8-E)?

Here's your answers, plus a bit more. I included ranges F thru I, and
added two ranges to fill the conspicuous gaps in the range scale. Sorry
that it's so wide. All figures are rounded to 2 significant figures, so
don't expect the answers to be *too* exact.

code       range      meters      1          2        3        4          5         6        10             20 
 8           500 km   5.0E+05     7m30s      5m20s    4m20s    3m50s      3m20s     3m        2m20s     1m40s 
 9         5,000 km   5.0E+06     24m       17m      14m       12m       11m        9m40s     7m30s     5m20s 
 A        50,000 km   5.0E+07      1h20m    53m      43m       38m       34m       31m       24m       17m 
 B       500,000 km   5.0E+08      4h        2h50m    2h20m     2h        1h50m     1h40m     1h20m    53m 
 C     5,000,000 km   5.0E+09     13h        8h50m    7h10m     6h20m     5h40m     5h10m     4h        2h50m 
      50,000,000 km   5.0E+10      1.7d      1.2d    23h       20h       17h40m    16h       13h        8h50m 
 D             1 AU   1.5E+11      2.9d      2.0d     1.7d      1.4d      1.3d      1.2d     22h       15h 
 E            10 AU   1.5E+12      9.1d      6.4d     5.2d      4.5d      4.1d      3.7d      2.9d      2.0d 
 F           100 AU   1.5E+13     29d       20d      17d       14d       13d       12d        9.1d      6.4d* 
 G          1000 AU   1.5E+14     91d       64d*     52d*      45d*      41d*      37d*      29d*      20d** 
          10,000 AU   1.5E+15    290d*     200d**    170d**   140d**    130d**    120d**     91d**     64d**
 H             1 ly   9.5E+15    720d**    510d**    420d**   360d**    320d**    290d**    230d**    160d**
 I             1 pc   3.1E+16   1300d**    920d**    750d**   650d**    580d**    530d**    410d**    290d**

1 AU = ~150,000,000 km
1 ly = ~63,000 AU
1 pc = ~3.26 ly = ~200,000 AU

*  tau factor is over 1% at turnover (ie turnover speed > 14% c)
** tau factor is over 10% at turnover (ie turnover speed > 44% c)

I didn't have a chance to dig up the relativistic formula, so the
figures marked with asterisks are *not* reliable! The others should be
quite reliable.

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com	<--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com	<--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 05:15:29 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Gateway & Viruses

In mail you write:

> Given that "canon" says (or strongly implies) that the only place
> that really has advanced medical knowledge is Terra, and that the
> Vilani do not -- simply because they are completely unrelated (in an
> evolutionary sense) to anything on their planet *and* that
> "canon-heads" have used this for years to "prove" that the way the
> Terrans won the Interstellar War was because of biowarfare
> (intentional or not) and that Vilani society was decimated after the
> war by the supposedly deliberate release of the "Plague of Duskir" by
> the terrans, then how about "Children of a Future Age" adventure in
> "Gateway"?

Which period is it set in? If it's set before the Realm of Man, then
yes, the Solomani may have better knowledge. If it's set *after*, then
the Solomani knowledge has spread. They may still have some advantage
due to starting out way ahead, but that's as far as it's likely to go.

> In it we have a virus so lethal to humans that it will wipe out an
> entire planetary population of at least a million (which is too small
> to support the tech level they evidently possess, but that's another
> matter) within three weeks *yet* it can be effectively researched and
> "cured" by the players with their advanced tech in a few days. Umm,
> does anyone else find this to be inexcusable *if* one accepts "canon"
> (which, admittedly, I've always found dubious and argued against
> anyway).

Canon has nothing to do with it, it sounds like the *adventure* is
broken badly.

> We are told that the source of the disease, the Sevalids (a
> pseudo-insect) is "native to Arishiir" (page #21) and that the
> disease evolved as a defence against any animal that ate it (page
> #20) ...  which, of course, means any *LOCAL* animal.

Evolution *has* done things that strange, but it'd *rare*. Maybe one
world in 100 would have something like that.

> Now, if we believe the extreme "canon heads" there is *no way* that
> this disease could affect humans in the way it does. The local
> animals are native to the planet and therefore are unrelated
> evolutionarily to humans -- therefore, so the canon-heads would have
> us believe, it could *never* affect humans! So, either the adventure
> premise is garbage *or* the canon-heads are wrong, and the Vilani had
> multiple -- probably dozens, even hundreds, of similar encounters
> with diseases prior to contact with the Terrans.

The adventure premise isn't *quite* garbage. It's just really, *really*
unlikely. The sort of thing thing that happens one world out of a
million. 

> Then, of course, with the right technology (from Sylea, where it is
> difficult to see that there would be much of an ongoing scientific
> ability with Terran diseases, given that the diseases we humans are
> most vulnerable to are carried generally by animal populations that,
> we can reasonably assume, are rare anywhere outside Terra)

People *will* take domestic animals to other planets if they settle on
them. Terran expansion during the ROM could have spread Terran food
animals all over the place. (It's easier to raise them locally than to
ship the meat around by starship). 

Why? Because the Terrans aren't used to roast womp-rat... :-)

> the Players are able to identify the disease, determine the "cure"
> and rescue the whole planetary population, with local low tech
> assistance being just as vital, in a few days. Sorry, if dealing with
> Viruses that are non-Terran in origin was *that* simple, then surely
> the Vilani would have had no trouble dealing with Terran diseases.

If they are actually viruses, then the *origin* doesn't matter much.
The biggest problem with studying *any* virus is getting it to
reproduce in the lab. That's because they are essentially a "program"
that hijacks the machinery in the cell, so that it starts producing
virus instead of things the cell needs.

But once you have human DNA mapped and well understood, and you get a
couple of tech levels above us in gizmos for getting the structure of
DNA and RNA, then your hard problem is sorting thru all the virus
present in the victims to find the one they have in common. Then it'd
be a matter of "reading the program" from the virus, and seeing how it
takes over the cells (and bypasses the immune system). Then you do
<????> and start curing patients.

The "<????>" is because at the moment, we know how to *immunize*
against viruses, but we don't know how to *cure* people who already
infected. All we can do is given supportive care. Eventually, things
like AIDS research will figure out *how* you stop a virus that's
already reproducing. But since we don't know how yet, all I can do is
handwave.  But the thing is, due to the *simplicity* of viruses, if we
crack the problem for one, it should work on *all* viruses, though I'd
be willing to bet that you'd need the structure of the virus first.

> And there's the problem that *no* disease is *ever* going to be as
> lethal, or as infectious, or as quick spreading as the virus in the
> adventure. The most lethal realistic biowarfare agent that was in
> development by the Russians and Americans was, evidently, Anthrax,
> and that was nowhere near 100% infectious, nowhere near 100% lethal,
> and was not capable of spreading far by itself.

So? Things like Ebola make anthrax look like a mild cold. Also, you
have forgotten one of the prime requirements for a biowarfare agenrt.
To be useful, you have to be able to immunize your people against it! 

> We are told that the virus in this adventure has been transformed
> into an aerosol form -- OK, seems fair on the face of it, but it is
> fairly easy to defend against such a virus ... you do what they did
> in Oz during the Spanish Flu epidemic, you restrict travel between
> population centers, you force all people wishing to appear in public
> to wear gauze masks, and you close all public places such as Movie
> Theaters, Churches etc.

Well, the best way to have a *nasty* epidemic is to have a *long*
incubation period, during which you are infectious but asymptomatic.
Only trouble is, while this lets you spread it all over before it gets
noticed, it also means that the die-off will be a lot slower.

> The displayed population level is only 6, or between 1 and ten nine
> million people, yet the Tech Level is supposedly 9, or equivalent to
> the 1990's. I doubt that such a small population could support that
> TL ... and anyway, the TL of transport displayed is far lower.

I suspect that such a tech level is supportable with such a population.
You have a lot of automation, and 90% employment. Given the way trade
works in Traveller, they may be importing the raw materials, or even
the parts that they build their high-tech stuff from.

> The quickest way, for example, to get to the Jungles where the insect
> is found is by spaceship -- yet a TL9 culture would have some sort of
> military or civil SST that could do it as fast.

Why? With a population that small, and a high tech level, they are
likely very concentrated. And during an epidemic, there may be problems
with the local services. Besides, it's tough for anything to beat a
sub-orbital hop for speed. 45 minutes max point-to-point. Unless they
have *need* for such fast transit, why bother?

> So even *spreading* the disease isn't going to be very fast -- as there seems to
 be a) no existince fast transport net, b) the small population will be too
 spread out to be 100% affected and c) the virus has such a short incubation
 period that it couldn't spread 100% through the populace anyway.

As I noted above, "small pop, high tech" tends to imply that they are
*not* spread out. More likely a bunch of medium to large cities in a
fairly restricted area, and just a few small outposts.

> Now, I'm as happy as the next guy to (as I think John W Campbell used
> to say) "grant the gadget and go", but *either* we must regard
> Gateway as contradicting the canon-heads *or* we must regard the
> interpretation of the canon-heads as being wrong. There is really no
> middle course.

No, there *is* a third alternative. You even mentioned it yourself
above. It's possible (even likely, given your description) that the
adventure is badly written and the author was an idiot. :-)

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 11:24:45 -0400
From: Eric Evans <ebevans@fas.harvard.edu>
Subject: Re: Sanity

I like the idea of gradual degradation of quality of life as jump follows
jump follows jump (it might make players slow down and spend some time
insystem). I, however, wouldn't use Call of Cthulhu as my model. "Scanners
Live in Vain" by Corwainer Smith works much better for me--in Traveller
terms, one could say that some, even most, people are sensitive to the
psionic characteristics of jumpspace and feel "the great pain" unless they
are protected by either sophisticated anti-jumpsickness drugs or advanced
jump field integrity shield technology.

- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Eric Evans
                            World Wide Web Administrator
                                 Harvard Center for Middle Eastern Studies

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 17:19:40 +0100
From: Simon Early <sre@taz.compulink.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Sanity

> Players will say
> "oh, my character only likes to read tech manuals and never takes leave
> and can only tolerate bland, really cheap food" in order to avoid spending
> any money. Mental disease is insidious. 

I'm in big trouble, and I never knew it :-).  I will translate the above 
sentence to reflect real life (for at least two people I know):

"I only ever read Traveller material, I never go away on holiday and I always 
buy what is on special offer at the supermarket"

OK, so I read computer magazines too, but it's close.
OK, so I might do some Live Role-playing as a "holiday", but that just 
maintains my combat stats :-)

I've rafted the rapids, climbed the Grand Canyon, seen the ruins of ancient 
civilisations, hunted for my own food, and more.  Having tried the "exciting 
life" I find that doing the things I enjoy is *far* less boring.  The things I 
find interesting may (and do) seem deadly dull to other people.


I know people who actually like travelling ... the journey is half the fun for 
them.  For me, travel is just a chance to read the latest tech journal ...


Simon
(it's mostly all true)

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 09:21:28 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: Re: Winded

On Fri, 29 Aug 1997, James Lindsay wrote:

> 
> All kidding aside, does this translate to mean that taser injuries are
> often more painful than bullet injuries at the moment the injury takes
> place (ignoring the searing lead and the sight of one's own blood)?
> 

Yep. That's one of the reasons they work, aside from the fact that if you
get zapped in the chest with one it knocks the wind out of you, which will
slow you down a bit.

Saw a special on 'non-lethal' weapons where they demonstrated an
electrified belt-manacle kind of thing for restraining very unruly
prisoners. A volunteer from the group had it strapped on and tried then,
to walk over to the cop holding the control. He couldn't do it. One press
of the button, and he fell to the ground, yelling in pain and twitching.

Of course, this is exactly why they're considering banning them...guards
have accidentally (or otherwise)  pressed the button, in one case as a
defendant was walking into the courtroom, which, since the jury didn't
know about the thing, made a very strange impression on them when the
defendant collapsed and started gibbering and yelling in front of them. 

Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 12:33:56 -0400 (EDT)
From: GDWGAMES@aol.com
Subject: Re: 0-G combat comments

<<Joseph "Chepe" Lockett <jlockett@io.com>
Subject: Re: Kinetic Energy vs. Momentum

Quoth Anders Backman:
> to space RPGers: as bullets normally have pretty small momentum all those
> stupid zero-G recoil rules are way off. Take a 10 gram bullet flying at 300
> m/s hitting an 80 kg guy with no blowthrough. Bullet momentum is 3 kgm/s,
> momentum conservation gives the man the same momentum and thus we deduce
> that he will get a speed of 3/80 = 0.0375 meters per second or about 4 cm
> per second.

Not bad if it converts entirely to linear motion (i.e. if you fire from,
or are hit directly at, your center of mass).  But it's the rotations from
off-center forces that will throw you out of control. >>

It was for this reason that (In the RCES Equipment Guide) we assumed that
Zero-G combat training would stress firing from the center of mass, and would
probably be equipped with laser sights to make this easier.

Loren Wiseman
   GDW Emeritus

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 09:37:08 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: Re: Sanity

On Sat, 30 Aug 1997 CardSharks@aol.com wrote:

> I have always liked the Cthulhu concept of gradual degradation of sanity as
> the character learns more and more about forbidden lore. But do we want
> Scouts going gradually insane as they explore new worlds?

Well, first, haven't we always said that Scouts were more than a little
crazy to _start_ with? ;-) seriously, part of the selection process would
be to pick people who _liked_ to travel and could easily handle hanging
out by themselves for weeks or months on end.

>
> Cracking mentally under the strain of interstellar exploration just doesn't
> fit the Traveller ideal. James Jamison, INTROM Captain (Captain in the
> Intersterstellar Navy The Rule Of Man) leads his squadron to head off a
> Vilani battle fleet, but the strain of being outnumbered is too much. He
> cracks at a crucial time. Terra loses. Its just not a really great adventure.

It is if you're a Vilani ;-P

Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs

> 

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 10:26:32 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: re: GLURBS

Glenn Hope writes

>I guess my real question is: Is there an easy way to convert your sensor
>rules to use a different scale? I'm not overly concerned that results
>match exactly, I'm just wondering if a type x sensor could be easily
>rated on another scale.

The conversion wouldn't actually be that hard. For all practical
purposes, 3=5 (I'm an astronomer) so your "300,000" band 
corresponds to the T4.1 "500,000" close enough...I could write a very
simple formula: Bruce R=GLURBS/2 +constant.
Unfortunately I've misplaced your original post - 
could you forward it to me (not the whole list!)

I don't like the range band decisions either...I actualy originally
did the DSR for a 3/10/30 scale, but i was told definitely Marc 
was going to use 5/50/500.

Bruce

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 97 18:27 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: Boredom and homicidal insanity in Traveller

In-Reply-To: <19970828105351Z30772-1005+2366@utu.fi>

RFXn,

> > T4.1 makes a point of avoiding specific reference to alcohol (and
> > drugs).Doesn't this sound genteel?
> > 
> > At its tables, people meet and enjoy light music or video,
> > conversation, and meals. 
>  
>  I'm sure this will make the guardians of public morality very happy.

You actually think they bother to read the books before they burn them?
Won't make any difference - they're already convinced we're 
child-murdering Satanists.
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 10:55:05 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: More CSC designed vehicles 2: Firefly ad Dragonfly recon craft

Rule3 Systems Inc. presents it's two newest designs in it's stable of high
performance military vehicles: the Firefly and Dragonfly recon craft.
Utilizing the latest technlogies these small, fast COACC craft are well
designed to get in close and gather intel about satellite hardened sites.

The Firefly is designed for pure high performance close in recon on a
planetary scale, yet it is quite affordable for most any planetary
government or mercenary company. (Due to Mil-spec componentry, an Imperial
Navy Permit 342a is required for purchase)

Firefly recon (TL12)
Designed by Bruce Johnson

Summary:
     0.34 displacement ton cylinder streamlined;  4.51 tonnes;  kCr 259
Chassis:
     4.76 kL cylinder streamlined (4.2 m long x 1.2 m wide x 1.2 m high);
Structure: 1.05 tonnes of light composite, rated for 6.0Gs, body 0.05 cm
thick, sealed to 1 atm, 2 armour rating;  Stealth Structure: -3DM against
TL12- military and TL13- civilian     
Performance:
     2.12 MW TL12 Fusion Plus power plant;  Fuel: 6.64 L of enriched water
(6.64 kg), 10 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 800 kW contragrav;  Maximum Speed: 4051 km/h;
Range: 40354 km;  Agility: -23DM
Crew:
     Crew roster: pilot;  1 crew station
Communications:
     Continental Radio (100 kW, TL12, SmVcl, MilSpec)
     Orbital Laser (1.00 MW, TL12, SmVcl, MilSpec)
Sensors:
     Active Subregional Radar (100 W)  Resolution: 0.200 mm per km of range
     Passive Subregional Optical (2 W, MilSpec, MultArray)  Resolution: 0.020 mm per km of range
Other:
     Options: sunroof (aka access hatch)
     Safety Features: anti-theft system, Roadgrid, fire suppression system
     526 L of cargo space


Designed with CSC (software Robert Prior, 1997)

For those more hostile threat environments, Rule3 recommends the
Dragonfly, the bigger, armed brother of the Firefly. Equipped with the
same high grade optical and radar sensor package, the Dragonfly also has
the ability to fend off unwanted attention with it's bite: 4 reloads each
TL-11 light and heavy missiles, under full launch to target fire control
by the pilot, as well as a milspec jamming system to confuse the enemy.
(Imperial Navy Permit 347a required for purchase due to armament and other
milspec components)

Dragonfly recon vehicle (TL12)
Designed by Bruce

Summary:
     0.69 displacement ton wedge streamlined;  11.3 tonnes;  kCr 791
Chassis:
     9.66 kL wedge streamlined (6.6 m long x 2.6 m wide x 1.7 m high);
Structure: 2.92 tonnes of crystaliron, rated for 8.0Gs, body 0.03 cm
thick, sealed to 1 atm, 2 armour rating;  Stealth Structure: -3DM against
TL12- military and TL13- civilian sensor     
Performance:
     3.67 MW TL12 Fusion Plus power plant;  Fuel: 11.5 L of enriched water
(11.5 kg), 10 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 2.00 MW contragrav;  Maximum Speed: 4050 km/h;
Range: 40346 km;  Agility: -23DM
Crew:
     Crew roster: pilot;  1 crew station
Armament:
     Weapon                          Damage    Range          Shots
Reloads   Notes
     Missile, Light-11               26 (16 expLong           1       4
+2DM, remote
     Missile, Heavy-11               41 (27 expVery Long      1       4
+2DM, remote
Communications:
     Orbital Laser (1.00 MW, TL12, SmVcl, MilSpec)
     Subcontinental Radio (100 W, TL12, SmVcl)
Sensors:
     Passive Subregional Optical (2 W, MilSpec, MultArray)  Resolution:
0.020 mm per km of range
     Active Regional Radar (1.00 kW, MilSpec)  Resolution: 0.200 mm per km
of range
     Active Subregional Jammer (100 W, MilSpec)  Resolution: 0.200 mm per
km of range
Other:
     88.8 L of cargo space


Designed with CSC (software Robert Prior, 1997)


Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 13:04:34 -0600 (MDT)
From: Marcus Teter <marcus@geminga.physics.montana.edu>
Subject: Re: Kinetic Energy etc....

James W. Lindsay wrote:

>From the above numbers we have deduced that the rifle now has a
>backwards velocity of 0.76 m/s.  Now, if one tries to calculate the KE
>of the rifle using the velocity determined from the momentum formula,
>we end up with a much lower KE value than that of the bullet... 1.4 J!
>Can the remaining kinetic energy (1803.6 J) _really_ end up as thermal
>energy in the weapon mass and propellent gasses?  What's up?
>Or am I doing something terribly wrong and deserve a good spanking?

The chemical energy contained within the cartrage is transfered to heat in
the propellant gasses and the Kinetic energies of the bullet and the
weapon.  The energy is conserved before and after the cartrage ignites.

Also someone else wrote that a Nm was a unit of momentum.  It is not, a Nm
is the same thing as a Joule.  Units of momentum are kgm/s, or Ns.

Take care all...
Marcus A. Teter
 

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 14:02:24 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Ship Missions

I am trying to fill out a table for ship design detailing various ship
missions.

Column 1 is the basic mission. Column 2 is a mission modifier.

Does anyone care to make some suggestions?

SHIP MISSIONS
Code	Basic	Suffix
	A	Auxiliary	-
	B	Battle	-
	C	Cruiser	Armed
	D	-	-
	E	-	-
	F	-	-
	G	-	-
	H	-	-
	I	-	
	J		
	K		
	L		
	M		
	N		
	O		
	P		
	Q		
	R		
	S	Scout	
	T		
	U		
	V		
	W		
	X		
	Y		
	Z		

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1763
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Saturday, August 30 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1764



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Civvie CSC designs
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1762
Small Walker
CSC Civvie designs: Grav Scooter
CSC designs: Ultralight Aircraft
Re: Clones in the 3rd imperium
Re: Sanity
Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1755
Re: Kinetic Energy vs. Momentum
Moving the RICE Papers
Re: Why I'm (probably) ditching T4
Re: Ship Missions
Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)
Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)
Re: Universal Range Bands
Re: Sanity

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 11:03:54 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: Civvie CSC designs

Just for the hell of it:
A Tl -12 garbage truck...

Garbage truck o' the future (TL12)
Designed by Bruce Johnson

Summary:
     18.00 displacement ton box;  128 tonnes;  kCr 76.8
Chassis:
     252 kL box (9.8 m long x 5.1 m wide x 5.1 m high);  Structure: 2.32
tonnes of light alloy, rated for 1.0Gs, body 0.05 cm thick, 1 armour
rating
     
Performance:
     1.00 MW TL12 Fusion Plus power plant;  Fuel: 2.66 L of enriched water
(2.66 kg), 8 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 1.00 MW wheels;  Maximum Speed: 23 km/h;  Range:
199 km;  Agility: +3DM
Crew:
     Crew roster: driver;  1 crew station
Communications:
     Subregional Radio (1 W, TL12, SmVcl)
Sensors:
     No sensors installed.
Other:
     Safety Features: Roadgrid
     Construction Equipment: crane can lift 12.0 tonnes
     247 kL of cargo space


Designed with CSC (software )Robert Prior, 1997)


Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 14:02:12 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Macpherson <john35@wharton.upenn.edu>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1762

 
James W. Lindsay said: 
>From the above numbers we have deduced that the rifle now has a
> backwards velocity of 0.76 m/s.  Now, if one tries to calculate the KE
> of the rifle using the velocity determined from the momentum formula,
> we end up with a much lower KE value than that of the bullet... 1.4 J!
> Can the remaining kinetic energy (1803.6 J) _really_ end up as thermal
> energy in the weapon mass and propellent gasses?  What's up?
> 
> Or am I doing something terribly wrong and deserve a good spanking?

	I think what you're forgetting is where the energy came from in 
the first place.  It was stored in chemical bonds in the bullet's 
propellant.  This chemical energy has been transformed into thermal and 
kinetic energy in the bullet, gun, and gasses.  
	Also, as I understand it, KE does not "cancel" the way momentum
does. If you throw two baseballs in opposite directions, their momentums 
will cancel, but you still have 2X KE in the system that wasn't there 
before.  The difference, as in the bullet example, is that 2X of chemical 
energy has been taken out of the system when your muscles acclerated the 
baseballs.
 
- -JM

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 11:00:34 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: Small Walker

Designed by request of Paolo Marini (sp? Sorry Paolo, the email with your
full name is on my desk at work) who is one of the unfortunate many who
don't have Macs.

The design was for a fuel cell powered TL(10)small walker similar to the
small walker in Empire Strikes Back. 

Small Walker (TL10)
Designed by Paolo

Summary:
     26.50 displacement ton sphere streamlined;  96.1 tonnes;  MCr 3.67
Chassis:
     371 kL sphere streamlined (8.9 m long x 8.9 m wide x 8.9 m high);
Structure: 2.77 tonnes of crystaliron, rated for 1.0Gs, body 0.01 cm
thick, sealed to 1 atm
     Armour: 10 front (1.5 cm), 10 sides (1.5 cm), 10 rear (1.5 cm), 10
top (1.5 cm), 10 bottom (1.5 cm);  Stealth Structure: -3DM against TL10-
military and TL11- civilian sensors
Performance:
     2.01 MW TL7 Fuel Cell power plant;  Fuel: 340 kL of liquid hydrogen
(24.3 tonnes), 20 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 2.00 MW legs with propeller for water use;
Maximum Speed: 27 km/h;  Range: 539 km;  Agility: +3DM
Crew:
     Crew roster: driver;  1 crew station
Armament:
     Weapon                          Damage    Range          Shots
Reloads   Notes
     Autocannon, Light-8             9         Long           100     200
+2DM, remote
     Machinegun, Medium-8            5         Long           200     500
+2DM, coaxial
Communications:
     Regional Radio (1.00 kW, TL10, SmVcl, MilSpec, DirAnt, DirFnd)
Sensors:
     Active Regional Radar (1.00 kW, MilSpec, DispArray)  Resolution: 1.0
mm per km of range
     Active Subregional Jammer (100 W, MilSpec)  Resolution: 5.0 mm per km
of range
     Passive Subregional Optical (2 W, MilSpec, MultArray)  Resolution:
0.200 mm per km of range
Other:
     655 L of cargo space


Designed with CSC (software )Robert Prior, 1997)


Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 11:11:15 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: CSC Civvie designs: Grav Scooter

Mods o' the future, Unite!

grav scooter (TL12)
Designed by Robert Prior

Summary:
     0.25 displacement ton open-topped cylinder streamlined;  1.42 tonnes;
Cr 5913
Chassis:
     3.50 kL open-topped cylinder streamlined (3.8 m long x 1.1 m wide x
1.1 m high);  Structure: 429 kg of light composite, rated for 3.0Gs, body
0.05 cm thick, 2 armour rating
     
Performance:
     50.0 kW TL12 Fusion Plus power plant;  Fuel: 78 mL of enriched water
(78.1 g), 5 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 50.0 kW contragrav;  Maximum Speed: 159 km/h;
Range: 794 km;  Agility: -3DM
Crew & Passengers:
     Crew roster: pilot;  1 crew station;  1 cramped passenger seat
Communications:
     Subregional Radio (1 W, TL12, SmVcl)
Sensors:
     No sensors installed.
Other:
     Safety Features: anti-theft system, Roadgrid
     1.28 kL of cargo space


Designed with CSC (software )Robert Prior, 1997)


Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 11:14:37 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: CSC designs: Ultralight Aircraft

Even in an age of contragrav, I'm sure some people will like pottering
about in the sky in one of these:
(actually the only TL-12 unit is the radio...everything else is about
TL-7)

ultralight aircraft (TL12)
Designed by Bruce Johnson

Summary:
     0.08 displacement ton open-topped needle airframe;  278 kg;  Cr 4260
Chassis:</DT>
     1.12 kL open-topped needle airframe (3.9 m long x 54 cm wide x 54 cm
high, wingspan 4.8 m);  Structure: 79.1 kg of light composite, body 0.01
cm thick, 1 armour rating
     
Performance:
     18.0 kW TL5 Imp. Internal Combustion power plant;  Fuel: 22.5 L of
high-grade hcarb (22.5 kg), 10 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 18.0 kW aircraft with STOL capability;  Maximum
Speed: 124 km/h, Take-Off Speed: 22 km/h;  Range: 1239 km;  Agility: +1DM
Crew:
     Crew roster: pilot;  1 crew station
Communications:
     Regional Radio (10 W, TL12, SmVcl)
Sensors:
     No sensors installed.
Other:
26.0 L of cargo space


Designed with CSC (software )Robert Prior, 1997)


Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 97 20:04 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: Clones in the 3rd imperium

In-Reply-To: <Pine.OSF.3.96.970829113210.8556A-100000@pill.Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>

Bruce,

> Strephon allegedly had clones made of himself to 'stand' in when he needed
> to be in two places at once, like be at and _not_ be at his assasination
> ;-) This however, leads to some interesting speculation regarding these
> clones: Either he was cloned at or very near to birth, so his clone
> appeared at or near his biological age, or the 3I has some means of
> accellerating growth enormously.

Medical Slow drug?
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 11:59:24 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Sanity

In mail you write:

> I have always liked the Cthulhu concept of gradual degradation of sanity as
> the character learns more and more about forbidden lore. But do we want
> Scouts going gradually insane as they explore new worlds?

But the new worlds aren't "forbidden lore" (though trying to understand
Hivers comes close! :-)

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 11:56:05 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations

In mail you write:

> In a message dated 97-08-30 07:59:07 EDT, you write:
>
> << At the temps that far away from a star, you can
>  >store hydrogen as a *solid*. >>
>
> I thought that solid, ie. "metallic" hydrogen could only be created under
> conditions of immense pressure akin to those in the interior of a gas giant.

Metallic Hydrogen and hydrogen "ice" are two *different* forms of solid
hydrogen. Just like graphite and diamond are different forms of solid carbon.

>  The temperatures found even at these stellar distances "might" allow for
> LHyd, but I don't think so.  IIRC ambient temperature of the universe,
> amazing concept that that is, lies around 7-8 Kelvin whilst LHyd is approx. 4
> Kelvin.

The background temp of the universe is 4 K. Hydrogen liquefies around
20 K. I'm not sure what the freezing point is, but it's above 0 K.
Helium won't freeze at all except under pressure!

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 12:00:47 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1755

In mail you write:

> On Thu, 28 Aug 1997, "RFXn" <mlaakso@utu.fi> wrote:
>
>> Subject: Re: Winded
>
>>       Better load that SKS with softnose rounds; a full-metal jacket rifle 
>> round punches through almost any kevlar vest at 100 meters, let alone 
>> 1 meter! More likely, the rifle used was either a .22 look-alike, or 
>> fired underpowered, handloaded rounds. The video is supposed to 
>> _sell_ body armor, remember. :)
>
>    Worse, the 5.45mm rounds used by Soviet .22-type weapons are steel
> penetrators; they have a steel needle core inside the lead bullet that
> will go through a car and still have enough energy to seriously injure
> someone.

A lot of the SKS ammo running around a couple years ago was that stuff.

>    Almost certainly, they were using handloads or low-power (rimfire)
> lookalikes. I don't know of _any_ ballistic protection that will stop
> full-powered centerfire rounds from a rifle.

Can you say "trauma plates"? 

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 11:47:59 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Kinetic Energy vs. Momentum

In mail you write:

> On Fri, 29 Aug 1997 17:36:18 PST, Leonard Erickson wrote:
>
>> In mail you write:
>> 
>> > So if it is momentum that is conserved and not kinetic energy, would
>> > it be fair to assume that the difference in calculated KE (between a
>> > firearm and a projectile based on 'm' & v) was energy in a different
>> > form (light, heat, etc.)?
>> 
>> *Both* momentum and KE are conserved. But as I got forcefully reminded
>> a few months back, Momentum is a *vector* quantity (ie it has both a
>> magnitude *and* a direction), but KE is a scalar (it only has a
>> magnitude). 
>
> You mean that _energy_ is conserved, not necessarily in the form of
> *kinetic* energy. (I think)
>
> So, if we have a 4.0 g bullet with a velocity of 950 m/s (5.56mm), it
> has 1805 J of kinetic energy and 3.8 Nm worth of momentum.  A 5.0 kg
> M-16 rifle would therefore have the same momentum due to conservation
> laws, which would translate into a backwards velocity of 0.76 m/s for
> the rifle.
>
> From the above numbers we have deduced that the rifle now has a
> backwards velocity of 0.76 m/s.  Now, if one tries to calculate the KE
> of the rifle using the velocity determined from the momentum formula,
> we end up with a much lower KE value than that of the bullet... 1.4 J!
> Can the remaining kinetic energy (1803.6 J) _really_ end up as thermal
> energy in the weapon mass and propellent gasses?  What's up?
>
> Or am I doing something terribly wrong and deserve a good spanking?

You are doing something wrong. The KE of the rifle is *not* required to
be equal to the KE of the bullet! That's not how the conservation of
energy works. Also, you have to consider the momentum and energy of a
*system*, not just an individual object.

Again, the *system* of bullet + rifle starts with 0 momentum. So it has
to end with 0 *net* momentum. So if the bullet has a momentum of 3.8 N m
*north* (remember, it's a vector!) then the rifle has to have a
momentum of 3.8 N m *south* (ie -3.8 N m "north") to balance out to 0.

The rifle starts out with some amount of chemical energy. Of this
energy (a scalar, thus no "direction" needed) of this 1805 J goes into
the KE of the bullet, 1.4 J goes into the KE of the rifle, and the rest
goes into heating the rifle and expanding the propellant gases.

Your problem is not realizing the energy and momentum are conserved
*seperately*. 

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 19:26:11 GMT
From: jeff.zeitlin@earth.execnet.com (Jeff Zeitlin)
Subject: Moving the RICE Papers

I'm finally moving the RICE Archives from my site at Execnet to
my Freelance Traveller site.  However, I have a bit of a problem:
it seems that many of the RICE Papers I have don't have the
author's name in them anywhere.  I do need this information, if I
am to properly credit authors for their work.  If you wrote or
know who did write any of these RICE Papers, please let me know.

Emerald
Hexos
Gerome
Menorb
Persephone
Lewis

- --=20
Jeff Zeitlin
jeff.zeitlin@earth.execnet.com

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 13:33:09 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Re: Why I'm (probably) ditching T4

Michael Koehne wrote

> Moin Phillip McGregor,
> 
> > The level of proofreading displayed in the damn thing displays nothing =
> > less than
> > *either* contempt for the buying public *or* a complete lack of even the =
> > most
> > minimal level of ability.
> 
>         Like you they have several software problems (the <-> at exampe)
>         and no time of profreading. eg. use use a mailer called "Forte
>         Agent 1.5/32.451" and your mailer destroyed your mail by encoding
>         it "quoted-printable", now when I'm quoting your mail. Its looking
>         bad. Of course you hav'nt proofread your mail in the UUCP spooler
>         so you did'nt saw what happend with your mail.
> 
>         Similars happend with T4 material also. ;-(

Yes but Phil is not getting paid to write this email, nor are we paying
to receive it (except for general Internet service, connect time, &
phone fees).  Therefore his message should be held to a lower standard,
as should all of our messages.

My writing for instances usually displays some spelling errors but if I
were getting paid for it I would make _quite_ certain to spellcheck it,
proof read it, and have someone else proof read it.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 14:54:59 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Ship Missions

At 02:02 PM 8/30/97 -0400, you wrote:
>I am trying to fill out a table for ship design detailing various ship
>missions.
>
>Column 1 is the basic mission. Column 2 is a mission modifier.
>
>Does anyone care to make some suggestions?
>
>SHIP MISSIONS
>Code	Basic	Suffix
>	A	Auxiliary	-
>	B	Battle	-
>	C	Cruiser	Armed
>	D	Destroyer	-
>	E	-	Escort
>	F	Fighter/Frigate	Fleet
>	G	-	Gunned
>	H	-	Heavy
>	I	-	Intruder
>	L		Light
>	M       Merchant Missile	
>	Q	Decoy	
>	R		
>	S	Scout	Strike
>	T	Transport	
>	U		
>	V	Carrier	
>	W		
>	X	Experimental	
>	Y	Yacht     Shuttle  	
>	Z		

- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 15:16:26 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)

At 12:12 AM 8/30/97 GMT, you wrote:
>On Fri, 29 Aug 1997 11:10:26 -0700, Douglas E. Berry wrote:

>So, if Mr. Klutz (6AP-- a *truly* pathetic individual) decides to use
>_all_ of his APs to run away (a total of 3 metres), Mr. Wayne (21AP)
>wants to make an aimed shot at him (4 AP) before Mr. Klutz gets away,
>and Mr. Klutz wins the initiative roll, does the shot take place after
>Mr. Klutz has run only 2 metres (ie: after 4 AP, the number of APs
>necessary for an aimed shot) or after he completes his "move" action?

This is really helping me see that I've got to really expand on the
Initiative/AP idea.

When you win the Init contest, you perform your action, whatever it is..
shoot, run, whimper.. whatever.  Unless you come into the line of sight of
someone else who can interfere, you complete your task regardless of the AP
cost.

When several people take part in a conflict, their tasks go off according
to how they did on the intiative task.  I'm debating making it a rule that
you have to declare what that action will be at the time of the intiative
roll (i.e. "I'm going to shoot at B") to make it possible to waste
shots/APs when something goes wrong.

>This sounds like it can get quite complicated with a group of a dozen
>combatants.  You are creating a situation where at least a dozen
>initiative tests might be needed (even more if all involved have large
>numbers of APs and they are planning to do multiple feats with them.

When you start getting up to a dozen combatants, you are beginning to
strain the system.  At that scale you should start abstracting combat to
some degree.  When it comes to people with large numbers of APs and
multiple actions, they'll quickly learn it's better to use those APs to aid
success and keep a reaction pool, because each time they do something, they
invite interference.

One of the characters in playtest had 26 AP!  He rarely performed more than
three actions in any one turn.. of course, he rarely lost intiative rolls,
and he usually succeded at what he tried.  When he attempted several
actions, his success rate went down and he tended to get hit after giving
the enemy several chances to shoot him.

BTW:  Quick clarification; when you make a to-hit task, you may declare
that you are firing up to the ROF of the weapon, and divide any aiming AP
among those shots as you wish.  This counts as a single action.  This only
applies when all the shots are fired at the same target.  For example, I
have a rifle with a ROF of 3, I fire all three shots (12 AP), with an
additional 6 AP spent on aiming, raising my to-hit number by 2 for each shot.

That should speed up combat a bit.

>On a related note, would throwing a 5kg+ object count as a LTA for Mr.
>Klutz?

Klutzy should be able to throw it in one turn.. I'll add a line about being
able to any single action regardless of AP somewhere.

- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 15:30:07 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)

At 12:12 AM 8/30/97 GMT, you wrote:
>On Fri, 29 Aug 1997 11:42:15 -0700, Douglas E. Berry wrote:

>After reviewing the consolidated AP list, I think-- IMHO-- that you
>may need to either increase the number of APs a character possesses or
>reduce a few of the AP costs a bit.
>
>For example, the average DEX-7 INT-7 Tactics-0 individual could only
>move 7m (14 APs) in a six-second combat round without resorting to
>sprinting.  The average person can _walk_ that fast-- never mind trot
>or jog.  Jumping down more than 2m shouldn't really take 8 AP to
>complete, *unless* the person failed the task test for landing.

I've changed the movement cost to 1AP/meter, and am looking at somekinf=d
of maximum to prevent Barry Allens with 25+APs racing around combat zones.

The jumping cost is so high because I've never seen anybody take a jump
without hesitating.

>Additionally, the "Standing up (from seat)" action may want to be
>rewritten to include "or crouch" and a "Sit/Crouch" action be included
>as well (there's gotta be *some* kind of posture between standing and
>being completely prone).

Done and done.

>The problem is that you run into situations with people with
>negligible skill shooting like sharpshooters.
>
>A character's skill contributes to the likelihood of achieving a hit.
>This skill is natural and does not constitute taking any extra time to
>"aim".  Therefore, if you and I picked up identical rifles and began
>firing at a difficult target _without_ bothering to "aim", the current
>combat system gives you a distinct edge.  So would real life.

After last night's play, the limit is maximum add to to-hit roll is 3x
Weapon skill, at the costs in the rules.

>> >> Rabbits are immune to lasers.  Don't ask.  

>It might be fun to include an "official" rules that "rabbits are
>immune to lasers", just to see how many people actually enforce it :P

I'm still getting mail asking about why I listed penguins as a thrown
weapon, so I think I'll leave the bunnies out of it for the time being.

>> Wound dynamics are a bitch to model for
>> a game.  Probably the best job was done by Millennium's End.
>
>Is ME made by "Leading Edge Games"?  If so, I have experience with a
>watered down damage system of their "Phoenix Command" rules (a la
>"Aliens" and "Living Steel").  "The Babylon Project" also has
>excellent damage & recovery rules.

ME is by Chameleon Eclectic(sp?), and is the best modern day RPG out
there.. highly recommended to those who like the techno-thriller genre.

I'm a Phoenix Command survivor.  There are 12-step programs avalible for
that system, y'know...

>> I can (and have) debated wound cavities, stopping power, and the hoary .45
>> vs. 9mm arguement for hours, but Traveller combat isn't the right place.
>
>What would /your/ one-word answer to the .45 vs. 9mm debate be, OOC?

..45

(OK, I can't help myself)  The .45 has a greater stopping power.  In a
combat pistol, having 15+1 rounds is not that great advantage, putting your
opponent down with the first shot is the idea.  Even the police are moving
away from the 9mmP towards .40 and 10mm weapons.

>> Problem there is that blowthrough is based on target mass.
>
>Oh, well....  You *do* know that this topic *will* come up again when
>more TMLers look at future drafts? :)

*Sigh*  I know.. the problem is that I like the blowthrough rule.. keeps
players from being walking death machines.

>Looking forward to future drafts,

I have a priority project to do first, but I am making revisions as I go..
give me a few weeks.

- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 19:01:45 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Universal Range Bands

In a message dated 97-08-30 15:23:05 EDT, you write:

<<  Here's your answers, plus a bit more. I included ranges F thru I, and  >>

Thank You.

I'm working on a variety of aspects of this problem. I would appreciate the
spreadsheet equations so I can manipulate it. Among other aspects I'm looking
at are one way accelerations... for missiles.

Thanks,


Marc

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 16:18:52 -0700 (PDT)
From: Craig Berry <cberry@cinenet.net>
Subject: Re: Sanity

> Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 09:37:15 -0400 (EDT)
> From: CardSharks@aol.com
> Subject: Re: Sanity
> 
> I have always liked the Cthulhu concept of gradual degradation of sanity as
> the character learns more and more about forbidden lore. But do we want
> Scouts going gradually insane as they explore new worlds?

I think it's pretty much accepted at this point that Scouts, are, as a
class, crazier on average than most 3I citizens.  Perhaps now we know
why... :)

I'm reminded of a comment by one of the psychologists in Robinson's "Red
Mars", discussing the selection of a crew for the first colony expedition
to Mars.  "Hey, they'll be crazy when they get there...why not just pick
crazy ones to start with?"

> Cracking mentally under the strain of interstellar exploration just doesn't
> fit the Traveller ideal. James Jamison, INTROM Captain (Captain in the
> Intersterstellar Navy The Rule Of Man) leads his squadron to head off a
> Vilani battle fleet, but the strain of being outnumbered is too much. He
> cracks at a crucial time. Terra loses. Its just not a really great adventure.

Oh, come on!  Not fun to play *Jamison*, perhaps...but imagine playing
members of his bridge crew, deciding whether to forcibly take over, or try
to remove him through proper channels, or...  A _Crimson Tide_ situation
sounds like one heck of an adventure to me!

Also, I've always wondered at the Second Empire *calling* themselves the
"Rule of Man."  Is feminism dead circa AD 2400?

- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
   |   Craig Berry - cberry@cinenet.net
 --*--    Home Page: http://www.cinenet.net/users/cberry/home.html
   |      Member of The HTML Writers Guild: http://www.hwg.org/   
       "Every man and every woman is a star."

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1764
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Saturday, August 30 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1765



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Heplar Fuel Consumption
Re: FFS2 questions.
New CSC Vehicles
Re: Kinetic Energy vs. Momentum
Re: Gateway & Viruses
Re: Ship Missions
Re: Ship Missions (Way Long)
Re: Ship Missions
Re: Gateway & Viruses

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 20:01:22 +0000
From: Tim Connors <tconnor@pop3.utoledo.edu>
Subject: Re: Heplar Fuel Consumption

>	Its not the modification point that's changed, it's the 
>_baseline_.  Actually, this change is quite appropriate for T-plate 
>ships, which tend to be rather dense, but for Heplar ships its a real 
>problem since they carry so much very not dense fuel.  If you can, I 
>reccommend calculating required thrust based on the ship's actual mass 
>rather than the "1 tonne/m^3" rule of thumb.  For heplar ships, this 
>should bring performance back to FF&S1 ranges.
>
>-JM
>
	Problem is -- I'm just (almost) too lazy to do the iterative technique
required. But, thanks for the idea, I hadn't actually considered that method.


Tim Connors

Don't lose heart
     . . . someone might want to cut it out
           . . . and they'd like to avoid a lengthy search.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 20:24:53 +0000
From: Tim Connors <tconnor@pop3.utoledo.edu>
Subject: Re: FFS2 questions.

At 08:42 PM 8/29/97 -0700, you wrote:
>1.  In the particle accelerator and meson design sequences, is the weight
>of the tunnel in kg or tons?
>
	Since the volume is given in m^3, I assumed tons.

>2. In the meson sequence what is the correct formula for determining
>intensity?   Is it DE/(Effective Range/Range)^2 like for PAs?  If not, what
>is it?
>
	The formula given is I = DE/(Range/Eff. Length)^2, but Eff. Length = Eff.
Range/1000; therefore when Range = Eff. Range, I=DE/1000000 which is
ridiculous.
I used the formula you have for the ones I designed and the numbers compare
well with FF&S1.

>Thanks.
>--
>+-------------------------------------------------+
>|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
>|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
>|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
>|*************************************************|
>|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
>|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
>|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
>|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
>|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
>+-------------------------------------------------+
>


Tim Connors

Don't lose heart
     . . . someone might want to cut it out
           . . . and they'd like to avoid a lengthy search.

------------------------------

Date: 31 Aug 1997 00:01:17 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: New CSC Vehicles

I've created some new CSC vehicles, uploaded to:

http://www.interlog.com/~dmci104/GamingClub/Traveller/vehicles.html

They include:

TL7 Light Plane
TL8 Frontier Fighter
TL5 Heavy Tank
TL6 Heavy Bomber
TL6 Intercity Bus
TL8 Intercity Bus

and a few more which I can't remember offhand.  The page has links to over
fifty vehicle designs.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 19:35:15 -0500 (CDT)
From: Joseph "Chepe" Lockett <jlockett@io.com>
Subject: Re: Kinetic Energy vs. Momentum

....subtitled "how fast does that Zhodani I just shot spin?"
....or "How doing math corrects my misconceptions."

I always hated angular motion in college physics.  Still, an interesting
problem will get me to revisit just about anything.  :-)  And I'd love
observations, advice, or corrections from those on TML wiser in these
arcana than I.  First, the background, with assumptions:

Quoth Anders Backman:
> Take a 10 gram bullet flying at 300 m/s hitting an 80 kg guy with no
> blowthrough. Bullet momentum is 3 kgm/s, momentum conservation gives
> the man the same momentum and thus we deduce that he will get a speed
> of 3/80 = 0.0375 meters per second or about 4 cm per second.

And later:
> Yes if hit off-center you'll start spinning really really slowly so if
> you're unconscious your aim will start wandering but for conscious guys
> no big deal (esp compared to the shock/arms thrashing etc you'd do when
> hit by the bullet. I'd say recoil normally doesn't matter in zero-G.

I felt doubtful.  So I thought I'd look at the math, and play with
conservation of _angular_ momentum for a sec.  (Non-gearheads may leave
the room if they're the sort to shout, though I'll try to be clear with
everything). 

To make things easy, let's assume the bullet lodges right in the crown of
our hapless Zhodani marine's head.  In the spirit of ethnic biogtry, let's
further assume that the Zho is a solid cylinder, of 80 kg mass, 2m tall
and 0.3m in diameter.  The rotation rate we calculate is likely to be a
bit on the low side, since most folks have more of their mass in their
midriffs than in their head or toes (and are thus easier to spin), but,
then, most people don't get shot precisely through the hairline either,
and shots closer to the center of mass will cause slower spin.  I figure
it's a fair cop.

Before impact, in a reference frame centered roughly on the Zho's navel,
the bullet has angular momentum L=mvr.  Anders gives m and v, and we take
r=1m, to yield an answer of L = 3,000 gm^2/s.  Our Zho marine has angular
momentum zero, but that won't last long.

After impact, though energy is unlikely to be conserved (brains being
squishy and all that), angular momentum will be.  A 10g bullet is pretty
insignificant in mass within an 80kg body, so we'll discount its effect.
Any body can have its angular momentum described by L=Iw, where I is its
"moment of inertia" and w (really omega) its "angular velocity".  For
a solid, homogeneous cylinder like our hypothetical Zho, my physics text
claims I=(1/4)*MR^2 + (1/12)*MH^2.  Plugging in H=2m and R=0.15m, and
M=80kg (80,000g), we get an I of about 27,000 gm^2.  If anybody knows
the _real_ moment of inertia for a human body, I'm not sure that I want to
hear from you, but it'd sure be interesting.

So, since L=Iw, to find w (which will be in radians/sec, which I promise
I'll convert), we take L/I.  L=3,000, I=27,000, so we get w=0.11 radians/s,
and since 2*pi radians equal 360 degrees, Joe Zho is now spinning head-
over-heels at a calculated speed of some 6.4 degrees per second, making
a complete rotation over the course of a tad less than a minute.

So I yield to you, Anders.  Thanks for convincing me to trot out the math.
I guess momentum transfer from bullets isn't such a big deal, outside of
_really_ massive or speedy bullets (hm, gyrocs, anyone?) or heavy autofire.
Assuming, of course, no massive muscle spasms from simple body reactions
or untrained panic, and the presence of nearby handholds to brush against.
I suspect Zero-G Combat training consists of both "coolness under fire"
and the ability to easily and automatically handle small spin corrections
like this one.

Just thought I'd post all this, since I'm loafing this Saturday, since
Great Old One Loren Wiseman had already responded to my post, and since I
figure the TML needs a bit more of folks admitting when they're wrong. :-)
I hope y'all found it as interesting as I did.

- ----------------------------*------------------------*------------------------
 Joseph L. "Chepe" Lockett  |"Nullum magnum ingenium | GURPS fan, Amiga user,
http://www.io.com/~jlockett | sine mixtura dementiae | Shakespearean scholar,
  Email: jlockett@io.com    | fuit." -- Seneca       | actor and director.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 00:54:24 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: Re: Gateway & Viruses

On Sat, 30 Aug 1997 09:45:05 -0400, you wrote:

>Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 05:24:10 -0800
>From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
>Subject: Re: Gateway & Viruses

>There is a much simpler explanation:
>
>The life on Vland is very unlike the life on Earth (as stated in
>numerous Traveller soures, most noteably Villani & Vargr.
>
>The life on Arishiir on the other hand may or may not be very unlike the
>life on Earth.  Gateway states that the life on Arishiir _is_
>sufficiently like the life on Earth that at least this disease can & has
>spread to humans.
>
>It is not intrinsically improbable that life on different planets will
>have different degrees of similarity to life on Earth.

OK, I find this inherently unlikely on a personal belief level -- but I can live
with it. However, can the "canon-heads" live with it?

After all, *if* it is true then it implies, as I implied in my original post,
that the Vilani cannot have been as unprepared (medically speaking) for Terran
Biowarfare or as vulnerable to the Plague of Duskir as the canon-heads would
like us all to believe. And it would certainly imply that *Terra* would be
vastly more vulnerable to *Vilani* (or Vilani *encountered*) diseases, simply
because the Terran population was so much smaller, and so much more
geographically concentrated.

>> Now, I'm as happy as the next guy to (as I think John W Campbell used to say)
>> "grant the gadget and go", but *either* we must regard Gateway as contradicting
>> the canon-heads *or* we must regard the interpretation of the canon-heads as
>> being wrong. There is really no middle course.
>
>I do not see Gateway as perfect but I respectfully do not see the
>contradiction you see.  Different planets can and will have life with
>different degrees of similarity to Earth life.

Which makes Terran Biowar and Plague of Duskir less and less likely to be
reasonable, as I have noted.

Phil
- ---------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU)
Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)
Designer, Standard Role Playing (PGD)

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 20:18:06 -0500 (CDT)
From: Joseph "Chepe" Lockett <jlockett@io.com>
Subject: Re: Ship Missions

Hey, Marc.  I presume the point is not just to reprise the grizzled old
chart from CT Book 5?  Below are some of my changes/thoughts/additions,
based in part on being a Navy brat (like yourself, if I read Book 5's
dedication aright!), but mostly just on Saturday evening noodling.
I'm sure some improvements are possible: just thought I'd get the ball
rolling.  I presume the main originator of these codes is the Imperial
Navy, and thus that they'll reflect their categories and predilections.

Quoth CardSharks@aol.com:
> Column 1 is the basic mission. Column 2 is a mission modifier.
> 
> Code	Basic		Suffix
> A	Merchant	Armed
> B	Battleship	Battle (i.e. for "standing in the line of battle")
> C	Cruiser		Colonial
> D	Destroyer	Armored
> E	Escort     	Escort
> F	Frigate     	Fleet
> G	Carrier   	Fast (i.e. high-gee)
> H	Hospital Ship	Heavy
> I	Courier		Light
> J	Tug/Tender	Long-Range (i.e. high-jump)
> K	Diplomatic Vsl	Intruder/Raider
> L	Researcher	Laser (i.e. largely armed with lasers)
> M	Monitor/SDB	Missile (i.e. largely armed with missiles)
> N	Station		Mercenary
> O	Mining Vessel	Commerce-Protection
> P	Corsair 	Planetoid-hulled
> Q	Auxiliary	Decoy
> R	Liner    	Fuel
> S	Scout     	Strike
> T	Transport/Tndr	Troop
> U	Small Craft	Unpowered
> V	Fighter    	Vehicle
> W	Barge/Module	Survey
> X	Sensor Vessel	Express
> Y	Yacht    	Luxury
> Z	Unknown-Purpose	Variant/Experimental

- ----------------------------*------------------------*------------------------
 Joseph L. "Chepe" Lockett  |"Nullum magnum ingenium | GURPS fan, Amiga user,
http://www.io.com/~jlockett | sine mixtura dementiae | Shakespearean scholar,
  Email: jlockett@io.com    | fuit." -- Seneca       | actor and director.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 21:46:20 -0400
From: Daniel Ray Lane <drlane@pinn.net>
Subject: Re: Ship Missions (Way Long)

CardSharks@aol.com wrote:
> 
> I am trying to fill out a table for ship design detailing various ship
> missions.
> 
> Column 1 is the basic mission. Column 2 is a mission modifier.
> 
> Does anyone care to make some suggestions?
> 
> SHIP MISSIONS
> Code  Basic      Alternate  Alternate  Armament   Suffix    Suffix
>-----  ---------  ---------  ---------  ---------  --------  --------
> A     Auxiliary  Assault    Attack                Ablatant  Armored
> B     Battle                                      B Globe 
> C     Cruiser    Corvette                         C-PAW
> D     Destroyer                        Driver     Damper    Drop	  	
> E     Escort	   Explorer                         EM
> F     Frigate    Fighter                          Fusion
> G     Gig                                         Gravitic                  
> H     Fueler                                      HEPlaR    Heavy
> I     Intruder                                    Insertion Imperial 
> J     Intruder   Jump
> K     Corvette           
> L     Lander     Light                            Laser
> M     Monitor    Merchant              Missile    Meson	
> N                                                 N-PAW
> O     Orbiter    
> P     Pinnace    Patrol     Probe                 Plasma  
> Q                Strike                Sensor           
> R     Rider      Research   Repair                Repulsor  Rift
> S     Scout      Shuttle    Sentient   Screen         
> T     Transport  Tender     Tanker                          Training
> U                Unpowered
> V                                                 Vessel
> W
> X     Express    Experimental
> Y     Yacht      Yard
> Z     Reserved  

Some WWII Designators:

BB  Battleship
CB  Battlecruiser
CVB Large Fleet Carrier
CV  Fleet Carrier
CVL Light Fleet Carrier
CVE Escort Carrier
CA  Heavy Cruiser (Armored Cruiser)
CL  Light Cruiser
DD  Destroyer
DE  Escort Destroyer
CM  Minelayer
CMC Coastal Minelayer
DM  Mine Layer (ex-Destroyer)
DMS Fast Minelayer (ex Destroyer)
PG  Patrol Gunboat

Some Present day Designators:

ARS  Auxiliary, Rescue-Salvage
CV   Fleet (Fast Attack or Assault) Carrier
CVN  (Same as above-nuclear Powered)
CG   Cruiser (Guided Missile)
CGN  (Same as last-nuclear powered)
DD   Destroyer (Anti Submarine or Anti Air-Spruance Class)
DDG  Destroyer (Guided Missile-Gas Turbine-Burke&Kidd Classes)
FF   Frigate
FFG  Frigate (Guided Missile, Gas Turbine-Oliver Hazard Perry Class)
PC   Coastal Patrol Craft
MHC  Mine Hunrter (Coastal)
MCM  Mine Countermeasures
LCC  Landing Command and Control (Amphibious Command)
LSD  Landing Ship, Dock
LST  Landing Ship, Tank
LPD  Amphibious Transport, Dock
LPH  Helicopter, Landing Platfrom-Amphibious Assualt
LHD  Helicopter, Dock Landing-Multipurpose Assault
LHA  Helicopter, Attack Landing-Gen. Purpose Assault
A+O   Auxiliary Oiler (Fleet Oiler)
AE   Auxiliary Explosives
AOE  Auxiliary Oiler-Explosives (Fast Combat Support)
AOR  Replenishment Oiler
AFS  Auxiliary Frozen Stores (Combat Stores)
YTB  Yard Tug Boat

LCAC Landing Craft, Air Cushion

CVX  Proposed next generation carrier
SC   Proposed SC-21 series combatant
SS   Submarine 
SSN  (Same as last-nuclear powered)
SSBN Submarine, Ballistic Missile-Nuclear Powered
SSG  Submarine, Guided Missile
DL   Destroyer Leader (not used any more)
DLGN (Same as last-nuclear powered, guided missile) This isn't used
PHM  Patrol Hydrofoil

All "DLG's" were renamed as cruisers in the late 70's/early 80's for
political reasons
PF  Patrol Frigate

- -Dan Lane

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 19:55:14 -0500
From: Sebastien Normandin <luckyj@microtec.net>
Subject: Re: Ship Missions

>I am trying to fill out a table for ship design detailing various ship
>missions.
>
>Column 1 is the basic mission. Column 2 is a mission modifier.
>
>Does anyone care to make some suggestions?

I haven't posted here in a while, so I might as give this a whirl. Looks
like fun!

>SHIP MISSIONS
>	Code	Basic	Suffix
>	A	Auxiliary	-
>	B	Battle	-
>	C	Cruiser	Armed/Commercial
>	D	Destroyer	-
>	E	Escort	-
>	F	Frigate	-
>	G	Gig	-
>	H	-	Heavy
>	I		Imperial/Industrial
>	J
>	K
>	L	Launch	Light
>	M	Medical	Medium/Mercenary
>	N		Naval
>	O		Orbital
>	P	Pinnacle	Patrol
>	Q
>	R	Research
>	S	Scout
>	T	Tender
>	U		Unmanned
>	V
>	W
>	X	X-Boat
>	Y	Yacht
>	Z

So, using these assumptions, a Heavy Escort would be code EH and a Patrol
Cruiser would be CP. Presumably more than one suffix is possible, though
this isn't neccessary. More possibilities exist, but I thought I'd wait and
see what everybody else came up with...



Sebastian Normandin

luckyj@odyssee.net

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 01:58:33 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: Re: Gateway & Viruses

On Sat, 30 Aug 1997 09:45:05 -0400, you wrote:

>Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 01:26:55 +1200
>From: Andrew Moffatt-Vallance <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
>Subject: Re: Gateway & Viruses (long)
>

>You've misinterperated why the Vilani were vulnerable. The problem was not that
>the Vilani evoloved on a world with an ecosystem unrelated to humans, but on a
>world with an ecosystem incompatible with humans; unrelated does not automatically
>equal incompatible. Indeed one of the basic unspoken premises of Traveller is that
>many ecosystems are compatible. If you spend a while to think on it, a compatible
>virus from an evolutionarily unrelated ecosystem can be both lethal and virulent.
>The human population has no natural immunity, having never encountered the virus
>or any of its relatives; thus no natural selection has occured and the population
>is forced to rely on genetic "dumb luck".

OK, I'll grant some of this. But the fact is that the Vilani, if we accept your
"revision" of canon, had obviously had to have had considerable experience with
diseases ... and some very nasty ones at that ... through there long pre-contact
history. This has interesting implications to canon, as I have noted -- it means
that Terran Biowar agents can be countered with Vilani ones, and that the Vilani
will be much less vulnerable to Terran diseases than the canon-heads claim, as
even very simple precautions can (and do) prevent infection by even the most
lethal of diseases.

>Secondly, again due to spending 300,000 years with out facing any risk of
>infection,
>the Vilani failed to develop the neccessary medical technology. When they moved
>into space, the undoubtedly did encounter many diseases which could infect them;
>however it would appear that the Vilani responded to these threats by quarantine.
>basically put, not only was Terran medical tech very good, Vilani medical
>tech was
>very very bad.

But if they have encountered diseases such as that proposed in Gateway *before*,
then I can see no answer but that they would have *had* to develop medical
technology. Of course, it all depends on what you mean by "medical technology",
I suppose.

Since the diseases they encounter would be endemic (and occasionally epidemic)
on worlds that they wish to rule, and since even quarantine is not really viable
against a world that you have some wish to rule, then they would have no option
but to develop methods for dealing with said diseases. This inevitably means
that they would have to develop disease handling technologies that would make
them far less vulnerable to Terran Biowar agents ... and would give them Biowar
agents of their own to use against the Terrans. It would also mean that the
methods of dealing with such diseases would be so widely available in the
medical literature that they would be vastly less affected than some of the
canon-heads seem to be saying they were by the Plague of Duskir.

>Thirdly, the nature of Vilani culture made them even more vulnerable. The Vilani
>lived in very close proximity to one another, sharing many facilities in common
>(eg eating, bathing etc.) and living in hostel like accommodations. This makes
>implimenting the basic precautions neccessary to halt the spread of infection much
>much harder.

Yes, but you can also take the "slash and burn" approach to disease prevention
- -- one that requires very little technology and which will stop a human vectored
disease in its tracks ... do what they did in Medieval Europe with the Plague;
mark a cross on the door and forbid anyone to leave until all are dead or all
are well. Use convicts to collect bodies of the dead at specified times (or use
robots) and incinerate them. Or do what the tribal elders do with Ebola
outbreaks -- put all the sick in a hut or huts that are well away from the rest
of the village and provide them with enough food and water to last; those that
survive survive, when all in the hut are dead (or well), burn the hut. Stops
Ebola in its tracks, too.

>Fourthly, the very nature of the pathogens the Vilani faced from the Terrans is
>fundimentally different to anything they would have encountered before. Every
>bacteria and virus the Vilani would have encountered before the Terrans
>would have
>been opportunistic organisms. These organisms would not have evoloved to infect
>humans, but just happen to have the capacity by fluke. Most =
opportunistic
>infections are not very lethal or virilent (there are exceptions, Ebola is an
>opportunistic infection). However, the Terrans carry with them many viruses and
>bacteria specifically evolved to target humans. The difference is that
>opportunistic infections will tend to be localised (occuring when humans stumble
>into the diseases life cycle); with the diseases the Terrans bring, humans are
>an intergral part of the diseases life cycle.

Well, as I understand it, there are few (or none) of the really lethal diseases
that affect humans that are evolved to attack humans. E coli in the gut may have
evolved with us, but (say) Bubonic Plague or Anthrax are *animal* diseases (and
have animal vectors) that are opportunistic in affecting humans when their
preferred hosts are not available. Humans are *not* the preferred hosts, nor are
they integral to the life cycle of Bubonic Plague, Malaria, Influenza (Spanish
=46lu is now pretty certainly known to be a mutation of Swine 'Flu rather than of
Influenza ... which is, in any case, a mutation of Swine 'Flu, but much further
back in time), Ebola and many other lethal or debilitating diseases. They have
animal or insect hosts that they prefer -- in fact, the inevitable trend with
diseases that make a *successful* crossover to humans is that they trend towards
reduced lethality evolutionarily, simply in order to ensure their own survival.
If they are mutations for increased lethality (like the Pneumonic mutation of
Bubonic plague), then they are generally so lethal that they burn themselves out
until the mutation re-appears in a later and separate outbreak (and in the
meantime, the disease may have mutated into an "acceptable" sublethal form that
precludes such a radical mutation).

>>Then, of course, with the right technology (from Sylea, where it is
>difficult to
>>see that there would be much of an ongoing scientific ability with Terran
>>diseases, given that the diseases we humans are most vulnerable to are carried
>>generally by animal populations that, we can reasonably assume, are rare
>>anywhere outside Terra)
>
>Here on Terra, most of the most lethal diseases don't have animal vectors
>(Pneumonic plague, Cholora, Small Pox, Thypoid, Tuberculosis etc.). Plus the
>diseases which caused the Plague of Duskir were not the big killers, they were
>things like Influenza, the Common Cold, Chicken Pox, Measles, Mumps etc.

Pneumonic Plague is an (evidently) common mutation that occurs in epidemics of
*Bubonic* Plague, which has groundhogs and rats as its preferred vectors. Does
the disease ever become widespread enough in the Central Asian groundhog burrows
to go epidemic, and do such epidemics go pneumonic? I don't know, but if they
did (and I see no reason why they wouldn't) then they would be, like the human
version, so limited and localised that a single burrow would likely be the only
area affected when the mutation occurs at a single point.

Cholera is thought to have had a non-human vector originally, but so far in the
past that no-one is sure what it may have been.

The rest are also likely to have had animal vectors originally, but, like
Cholera, have adapted to the point where direct human-human transmission is
possible.

Of course, the plague in "Gateway" has done the same thing. Which, if you accept
it as "canon", means that there is a certainty that the Vilani have encountered
something like it previously.

As for the spread of such common diseases as you suggest being the cause of the
so-called "Plague of Duskir", well, *if* the Terrans *did* use Biowar against
the Vilani (and I don't believe that they did, or that it had any more effect
than Vilani use of Biowar against Terrans would have -- limited and localised,
and militarily insignificant in the broader context of the war(s)), then are you
suggesting that they did not know that these diseases would be ones against
which the Vilani would have no defences? That they deliberately sent plague
carriers throughout the empire? That they did not make every attempt (as the
Spanish did, given the resources of the time, to protect their indian subjects
in Mesoamerica from the ravages of smallpox ... because they wanted to save them
for slavery, or because they were already slaves) to protect their subjects.

Given that we know there was often as few as one (or even no) Terrans on the
occupied planets, then the disease pool for the diseases, assuming a reasonably
competent Terran medical administration, amongst the arrivals is nonexistent.
And, if they *do* have a diseases, they also have the antibodies in their
bloodstream that will enable a vaccine to be made from it -- if you allow the
semi-miraculous claims for Terran Biowar tech. Even the Vilani would be able to
handle making vaccines because, as should be obvious, they would have had to
have previously -- in the meantime, quarantine provisions would limit the spread
until sufficient doses of vaccine were available. That's assuming that you
accept the Gateway virus as being "canon".

>>the Players are able to identify the disease, determine
>>the "cure" and rescue the whole planetary population, with local low tech
>>assistance being just as vital, in a few days. Sorry, if dealing with Viruses
>>that are non-Terran in origin was *that* simple, then surely the Vilani would
>>have had no trouble dealing with Terran diseases.
>
>Assuming that the Vilani understood the concept of vaccination and antibodies,
>which in turn requires an understanding of the immunioresponse system. And since
>the Vilani had no mechanism to trigger their immunioresponse system on Vland, it
>would not seem unreasonable to assume that they did not.

No, the *Vilani* on *pre-spaceflight* Vland would have had no reason to.
However, the first time they caught a disease on a less hostile -- or, as you
say, more compatible, world they would have paid attention to the locals and
*they* would have had some idea (as did pre-modern terrans) of the ways to treat
such diseases. Since the only way for the *locals* to deal with such diseases as
were endemic/epidemic *locally* would be to use technology (or quarantine,
probably both) there would be many planets around the empire where the medical
knowledge would exist. Then, given computer tech and the widespread spread of
knowledge, there would be no excuse for what passed for the Vilani medical
community to become aware of these diseases, how they were spread, and how to
control them ... after all, the Ziru Sirka was a trading empire, and this means
there must inevitably have been trading in diseases (by accident, as biological
cargoes were traded) ... and since you are claiming the Vilani would have had no
medical knowledge (at least to begin with) they would often have sector wide
outbreaks of unknown diseases that would be traced down to a single planet of
origin and probably shipments of foods or other exotic biologicals.

Then, of course, we know that at least one world was used by the Ancients as a
biological preserve and had Whales and other Terran organisms there ... and
since animals are a classic disease pool for humans, that world at least would
have been the source of much scientific development. And we can reasonably
assume that there would have been other worlds where fewer Terran animal species
would have been settled, and on some they would have survived, providing disease
pools for crossover.

Anyway, *if* the Vilani were so vulnerable -- how do you explain the fact that
the Vargr (geneered Terran canines) and Zhodani (humans as well) were completely
unaffected in "canon" by anything like the Plague of Duskir or Terran Biowar
efforts? The answer -- the same reason that "canon" re Biowar and the Plague of
Duskir should be seen as Vilani excuses for being beaten fair and square by
superior Terran technology and tactics ... it's the old "stab in the back"
theory. Don't blame your *own* shortcomings, blame "perfidious Terra!"

>>And there's the problem that *no* disease is *ever* going to be as lethal, or as
>>infectious, or as quick spreading as the virus in the adventure. The most lethal
>>realistic biowarfare agent that was in development by the Russians and Americans
>>was, evidently, Anthrax, and that was nowhere near 100% infectious, nowhere near
>>100% lethal, and was not capable of spreading far by itself.
>
>Sorry the most lethal biowar agent experimented with was botulism (botulinal
>toxin A to be precise if memory serves). It does have a lethality of close to
>100%. You should read the Stockholm Peace Research Institutes report on
>chemical and biological warfare to see just how nasty some of the pathogens

Botulism *toxin* is, of course, *not a disease* ... it is a *poison* that is the
waste product of a disease. The disease itself is not lethal, the waste
product/poison is. And the "biowar" agent they made was the *toxin* and *not*
the disease itself. It really should be classified with "chemical" weapons
(poison gases and the like) for that reason.

>experimented with are (they managed to find a strain of Rabbit Fever
>[Francisella tularensis] with a mortality rate of 60%). Also antrax was found
>to be very infectous, just you needed exposure to a high number of bacteria
>(around 20,000 spores), but thats only twice the exposure required for

A mortality rate of 60% is not 100%. And such diseases can be limited in spread
by the same simple measures that limited (eventually) the spread of Spanish 'Flu
(gauze masks, limiting public gatherings etc.)

>Pnuemonic Plague. Oh and by the way, pulmonary anthrax is close to 100% fatal.
>As to the virus in Gateway, consider Pnuemonic Plague, Incubation period 3-4
>days, followed by a fever lasting 3-4 days. If untreated mortality is 90-100%;
>yes diseases can be that virulent and that fast.

Yes, pulmonary Anthrax *is* 100% lethal -- its also damn rare and pretty damn
hard to actually *contract*.

As for Pneumonic Plague, when it was originally reported in the Middle Ages, it
was far more lethal than it seems to be today -- the incubation period was (as
far as records seem to indicate) no more than 24 hours, and probably less
(especially if acquired through aerosol transmission directly into the lungs,
rather than through cuts or sores on the skin or contaminated food), and the
death rate was 99% or more, and was within 24 hours of the onset of symptoms,
often less. Suburbs within plague affected cities are known to have been
completely wiped out almost overnight by what is suspected to have been the
Pneumonic form of plague, ditto smaller rural villages. But even the Vilani
don't live as cheek by jowl as they did in the Middle Ages ... and there is
considerable evidence to suggest that susceptibility to the Plague is increased
in those subjects with poor general health and nutrition (which also doesn't
apply to the Vilani). And, in this specific instance, what would the vector be?
Rats are the preferred host, but such large mammals would be too obvious, and
too few could be smuggled in ... so it seems that even minimal quarantine
measures would work.

>>We are told that the virus in this adventure has been transformed into an
>>aerosol form -- OK, seems fair on the face of it, but it is fairly easy to
>>defend against such a virus ... you do what they did in Oz during the Spanish
>>Flu epidemic, you restrict travel between population centers, you force all
>>people wishing to appear in public to wear gauze masks, and you close all
>public
>>places such as Movie Theaters, Churches etc.
>
>>The displayed population level is only 6, or between 1 and ten nine million
>>people, yet the Tech Level is supposedly 9, or equivalent to the 1990's. I
>doubt
>>that such a small population could support that TL ... and anyway, the TL of
>>transport displayed is far lower. The quickest way, for example, to get to the
>>Jungles where the insect is found is by spaceship -- yet a TL9 culture would
>>have some sort of military or civil SST that could do it as fast.
>
>Why do you doubt that 1-9 million people could support a TL 9 culture? It seems
>a sufficent population to mantain an indstrial production base. However having
>TL 9 does not mean that you have all the gadgets you would associate with it.
>At 1-9 million people, they probably don't need an SST (assuming that the SST
>could land in the middle of the jungle in question).

Well, that's always been the problem with the Traveller TL system. What does
TL"X" actually *mean* ... but since the world is said to be TL9, and TL9 is said
to equal Terra as it is here and now, then I think we can reasonably argue that
their population base is too small to support the number of experts and
technicians to have a TL9 culture as it is defined. And, the adventure specifies
that the population is 1 million anyway.

>>So even *spreading* the disease isn't going to be very fast -- as there seems to
>>be a) no existince fast transport net, b) the small population will be too
>>spread out to be 100% affected and c) the virus has such a short incubation
>>period that it couldn't spread 100% through the populace anyway.
>
>Well the virus was released by a meglomanicial madman. I can't see any reason
>why he would limit himself to just one release site. It wouldn't take too much
>planning to ensure that the entire world was covered in a timely fashion. Take
>the world's land area of 148.5 million km^2 (out of 209.2 million km^2), spread
>say 1000 canisters of virus, thats 148,500 km^2 per canister. Assume the madman
>has done his work and the virus can last a respectable period outside a host and
>its quite within the realms of possibility.

Even if there were multiple sites, it simply isn't going to spread as fast as it
does in the book.

>>Now, I'm as happy as the next guy to (as I think John W Campbell used to say)
>>"grant the gadget and go", but *either* we must regard Gateway as contradicting
>>the canon-heads *or* we must regard the interpretation of the canon-heads as
>>being wrong. There is really no middle course.
>
>>Personally, I'd argue for the latter -- but I'm sure the canon-heads will argue
>>for the former rather than admit they might possibly be wrong (and, of course,
>>*i* could <never> be wrong :,>
>
>>(Flame retardant underwear *on*)
>
>Actually I don't see either option as being neccessary. Gateway is believable
>(farfetched perhaps) and the Vilani were vulnerable to Terran diseases due to
>the fact that they evolved amongst an incompatible ecosystem.

And its here that we will have to agree to disagree, I suppose.

Phil
- ---------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU)
Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)
Designer, Standard Role Playing (PGD)

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1765
***********************************
Traveller-digest      Sunday, August 31 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1766



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Medivac Chopper (TL7)
Coastal Defense Boat (TL8)
Re: Sanity
B5 Release Dates
Re: Ship Missions
CSC Cessna Skylane...
CSC TL3 steam wagon
CSC WWI-Biplane
CSC Supermarine Spitfire
Re: Universal Range Bands
Re: Kinetic Energy vs. Momentum
Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 
With Sympathy
Zhodani & Disease
RE: B5 Release Dates
Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)
Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 
Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 31 Aug 1997 02:15:41 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Medivac Chopper (TL7)

Medivac Chopper (TL7)
Designed by Robert Prior

Small and cheap, intended for use behind friendly lines. A small radar unit
can be added for 30kCr.


Summary:
     0.80 displacement ton box;  2.19 tonnes;  kCr 71.9
Chassis:
     11.2 kL box (3.5 m long x 1.8 m wide x 1.8 m high);  Structure: 290 kg
of light alloy, rated for 1.0Gs, body 0.04 cm thick, 1 armour rating
     
Performance:
     401 kW TL7 Turbine, Gas power plant;  Fuel: 360 L of high-grade hcarb
(360 kg), 6 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 400 kW helicopter;  Maximum Speed: 296 km/h;  Range:
1774 km;  Agility: +3DM
Crew & Passengers:
     Crew roster: pilot;  1 crew station;  4 roomy passenger seats
Communications:
     Regional Radio (1.00 kW, TL7, SmVcl, MilSpec, DirAnt, DirFnd)
Sensors:
     No sensors installed.
Other:
     648 L of cargo space


Designed with CSC (software (c) Robert Prior, 1997)

------------------------------

Date: 31 Aug 1997 02:16:18 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Coastal Defense Boat (TL8)

Coastal Defense Boat (TL8)
Designed by Robert Prior

Summary:
     9.00 displacement ton needle;  113 tonnes;  MCr 1.07
Chassis:
     126 kL needle (18 m long x 2.6 m wide x 2.6 m high);  Structure: 2.11
tonnes of hard steel, rated for 1.0Gs, body 1.0 cm thick, 6 armour rating
     
Performance:
     10.0 MW TL5 Imp. Internal Combustion power plant, water-cooled;  Fuel:
62.7 kL of high-grade hcarb (62.7 tonnes), 50 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 10.0 MW high performance watercraft;  Maximum Speed:
115 km/h;  Range: 5728 km;  Agility: +3DM
Crew & Passengers:
     Crew roster: helmsman, 3 gunners, sensor operator, captain, 3 deckhands;
 9 crew stations;  1 roomy passenger seat
Armament:
     Weapon                          Damage    Range          Shots   Reloads   Notes
     Missile, AA-8                   22 exp    Long           1       9        1 gunner
     Missile, Heavy-8                34 (22 expLong           1       3        1 gunner
     Cannon, Heavy-8                 19 (17 expVery Long      1       29       +4DM, 1 gunner
     Autocannon, Light-8             10 (7 exp)Long           100     19       +4DM, remote
     Autocannon, Light-8             10 (7 exp)Long           100     19       +4DM, remote
Communications:
     Subcontinental Radio (10.00 kW, TL8, SmVcl, MilSpec)
Sensors:
     Active Subcontinental Radar (10.00 kW, MilSpec, DispArray)  Resolution:
2.0 cm per km of range
     Active Regional Sonar (1.00 kW, MilSpec, DispArray)  Resolution: 2.0 cm
per km of range
Other:
     Options: recreation space, kitchen for 10 simultaneous meals
     Safety Features: fire suppression system
     744 L of cargo space


Designed with CSC (software (c) Robert Prior, 1997)

------------------------------

Date: 31 Aug 1997 02:24:02 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: Sanity

>Also, I've always wondered at the Second Empire *calling* themselves the
>"Rule of Man."  Is feminism dead circa AD 2400?

No. Women are secure enough that they don't feel threatened by terms like
that.  And political correctness is dead.  (It's a future history, so I'm
picking the future _I_ want :-)

------------------------------

Date: 31 Aug 1997 02:26:11 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: B5 Release Dates

This is actually semi-on-topic, because I like the B5 combat system (realistic
wounding effects, according to my paramedic relatives) and I've heard that
the starship combat is fast, fun, and feels Travellerish (whatever that
means).

So, does anyone know when anything other than the basic rulebook will be
released???

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 23:00:31 -0400
From: Daniel Ray Lane <drlane@pinn.net>
Subject: Re: Ship Missions

Proposed Ship Sizes & Types:

Definition: "Capital Ship" - A ship, the movement of which, carries
with it political raminfications.  (Current examples:  CVs/CVNs, 
SSBNs, CGNs and some CGs, some DDG-51 class (later hulls), possibly
some SSNs (esp poss SSN 21).



          ...Capital Ships - Ships of the Line of Battle...


II, IF, IH, IB - Intruder ("Imperial," "Fleet," "Heavy" or "Battle")
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applied only to the largest classes of ships - Sometimes referred to as 
"super" dreadnaughts.  By virtue to their heavily armament, armor, and
size, capable of dominating the line of battle and defeating even 
dreadnaught type ships.  Armament and size ensures victory over even the 
largest Battle Riders currently in existence.  The largest and most 
heavily armed ships in known space.  Listed in general order of
decreasing
potency.

By virtue of armor, armament and size, capable of pentrating deep behind
enemy lines and carrying the battle to the enemy with little or no
external support.

Displacement Ranges: II - 10    to  50 M (~3  c.1119 3I) (~ 3-5 km long)
(TONd)               IF -  5    to  10 M (~24 c.1119 3I) 
                     IH -  5    to  10 M (~2  c.1119 3I)
                     IB -  1    to  5  M (~5  c.1119 3I)          

Note that the term "Intruder" may also refer to a much smaller vessel
designed to penetrate enemy lines undetected to carry out recon,
commerce raiding or clandestine operations.

BI, BH, BB, BL - Battleship ("Imperial," "Heavy," "Battle," "Light")
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
A ship of the Line of Battle.  Nomenclature applied to ships capable of 
standing in the typical line of battle while operating as a part of a 
battlegroup.  The most modern and heavily equipped of these ships are 
referred to as "dreadnaughts" while similar but lest modern or powerful 
ships are simply referred to as "battleships."

                     BI -  500K to  1  M (~2415 c.1110 3I)
                     BH -  1    to  10 M (~70  c.1119 3I) (Armored)
                     BB -  500K to  1  M (~385 c.1119 3I)
                     BL -  100K to  50K  (~455 c.1119 3I)
                
BC - Battlecruiser
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Heavily armed and engined (both jump and maneuver) but lightly armored
ships capable of dominating gaining rapid victory over equivalent sized
ships by virtue of superior mobility and armament.

                     BC - 100K to   500K (~105 c.1119 3I)



                       ...Major Combatants...


CH, CB, CL, CA - Cruiser (Heavy, Battle, Light, Armored)
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------         
Heavily armed, heavily engined ships configurd for extreme endurance, 
capable of dominating typically encountered large warships not of the
Line of Battle.  Cruisers are typicaly assigned deep patrol, penetration, 
or strike missions due to their enhanced mobility. They make also act
as screening or escort ships for battle or carrier formations during
battlegroup operations.

                     CH - 100K to   500K (~1120)
                     CB - 100K to   500K (~1960)
                     CL -  50K to   100K (~1015)
                     CA -  50K to   100K (~945)

DH, DD, DL, DE - Destroyer (Heavy, Line, Light, Escort)
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Smaller heavily armed multipurpose vessels designed for deep heavy escort,
deep patrols, and maintenance of spacelines of communication.  The typical
IN vessel encountered in independent operations (IO).


                     DH -  10K to   50 K  (~11165)
                     DD -  10K to   50 K  (~5425)
                     DL -   5K to   10 K  (~1995)
                     DE -   1K to   5  K  (~11620)


OTHER - 3291 (of varying displacements)


                     ...Minor Combatants...

FF - Frigate
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lightly armed local patrol vessel used primarily in patrol of spacelanes
and local systems/clusters.  A typical size for larger system defense
craft
and patrol vessels.


                     FF -   5C to   1  K  (~2706) 

KK - Corvette 
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Small, ubiquitous vessel typical of the small armed craft employed for
customs and piracy suppresion patrols.

                     KK -   1C to   5  C  (~18876)

EC, EP - Escorts (Close, Patrol)
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------

Heavily armed fleet escorts designed to act in a close screening (EC)
or distant screening role.

                     EC -   1C to   5  C   (~27126

PC, PG - Patrol (Cruiser, Gunboat, Missile, Intruder)
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------

Typical small ships.  Type "S" Scouts probably fall into the "PC"
category if
they were equipped with larger drive suites.

                     PC -   1C to   5  C   (~46596)
                     PG -   1C to   5  C   (~1320)
                     PM -   1C to   5  C   (~25542)
                     PI -   1C to   5  C   (~1980)

OTHER - 1854

- -Dan Lane

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 22:19:54 -0400
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: CSC Cessna Skylane...

	Here's an attempt at your basic Cessna, using Rob's CSC:

Cessna Skylane (TL7)
Designed by R.D.Elliott

Summary:
     0.48 displacement ton cylinder airframe;  3.03 tonnes;  kCr 274
Chassis:</DT>
     6.72 kL cylinder airframe (4.7 m long x 1.4 m wide x 1.4 m high,
wingspan 8.5 m);  Structure: 473 kg of fiber laminate, body 0.13 cm thick,
1 armour rating

Performance:
     400 kW TL5 Imp. Internal Combustion power plant;  Fuel: 200 L of
high-grade hcarb (200 kg), 4 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 400 kW aircraft;  Maximum Speed: 285 km/h, Take-Off
Speed: 128 km/h;  Range: 1139 km;  Agility: +2DM
Crew & Passengers:
     Crew roster: pilot, copilot;  2 crew stations;  2 cramped passenger sea=
ts
Communications:
     Regional Radio (10 W, TL7, SmVcl)
Sensors:
     No sensors installed.
Other:
Options: entertainment centre
Safety Features: fire suppression system
167 L of cargo space


Designed with CSC (software =A9Robert Prior, 1997)

Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 23:28:04 -0400
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: CSC TL3 steam wagon

	Here's a little something inspired by the Machine People's steam
wagons from the Ringworld novels...  At the risk of sounding completely
insane, another shortcoming of the VDS is that it doesn't allow for alcohol
fuel for early TL steam engines :).



Steam wagon (TL3)
Designed by R.D. Elliott
Summary:
     4.00 displacement ton open-topped box;  22.3 tonnes;  kCr 98.7
Chassis:</DT>
     56.0 kL open-topped box (5.9 m long x 3.1 m wide x 3.1 m high);
Structure: 849 kg of heavy wood, body 0.30 cm thick, 0 armour rating

Performance:
     600 kW TL3 Early Steam power plant;  Fuel: 2.88 kL of wood (1.44
tonnes), 24 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 600 kW wheels;  Maximum Speed: 29 km/h;  Range: 695
km;  Agility: +3DM
Crew & Passengers:
     Crew roster: driver, 2 gunners, navigator, 4 rifle gunners;  8 crew
stations (1.0 cm of Soft Steel armour, rating 4);  6 cramped passenger
seats (1.0 cm of Soft Steel armour, rating 4)
Armament:
     Weapon                          Damage    Range          Shots Reloads   Notes
     Cannon, Light-3                 6 (10 exp)Very Short     1       50 2 gunners
Communications:
     No communicators installed.
Sensors:
     No sensors installed.
Other:
Options: recreation space, wet bar
7.87 kL of cargo space


Designed with CSC (software =A9Robert Prior, 1997)

Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 23:14:02 -0400
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: CSC WWI-Biplane

	Here's a WWI-ish fighter-bomber; I visualize it as being something
similar to a Bristol fighter; pilot, with one gunner manning a rear-facing
machinegun.  Discovered another shortcoming to VDS; it does not allow for
wood&canvas construction, so I had to enable the relic technology option
and substitute fiber laminate construction instead.



Biplane fighter/bomber (TL4)
Designed by R.D. Elliott

Summary:
     0.40 displacement ton cylinder airframe;  3.02 tonnes;  kCr 81.9
Chassis:</DT>
     5.60 kL cylinder airframe (4.4 m long x 1.3 m wide x 1.3 m high,
wingspan 8.0 m);  Structure: 167 kg of fiber laminate, body 0.13 cm thick,
1 armour rating

Performance:
     400 kW TL4 Internal Combustion power plant;  Fuel: 200 L of
hydrocarbons (200 kg), 5 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 400 kW aircraft with STOL capability;  Maximum
Speed: 254 km/h, Take-Off Speed: 96 km/h;  Range: 1269 km;  Agility: +2DM
Crew:
     Crew roster: pilot, gunner;  2 crew stations
Armament:
     Weapon                          Damage    Range          Shots
Reloads   Notes
     Machinegun-4                    4         Medium         200
coaxial
     Machinegun, RF-4                4         Medium         200
1 gunner
     Machinegun-4                    4         Medium         200
coaxial
     Bomb, Light-5                   37 exp    Contact        1
coaxial
Communications:
     No communicators installed.
Sensors:
     No sensors installed.
Other:
1.28 kL of cargo space


Designed with CSC (software =A9Robert Prior, 1997)

Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 23:00:38 -0400
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: CSC Supermarine Spitfire

	Here's an attempt at doing a Spitfire using Rob's CSC.  Doing this
one, it appears that the VDS does not model TL-5/6 aircraft well.  For one,
light alloy as a material is not available at TL-5, whereas it was in use
in WWII aircraft.  Secondly, the performance figures are low; if one
switches km/h for mph, the performance looks a lot closer to late-Mark
Spitties.  And this thing is woefully underarmed compared to even the
early-mark Spitfires, which packed 8 .303 machineguns.

	However, it's as close as I could get it.



Supermarine Spitfire (TL6)
Designed by R.D. Elliott

Summary:
     2.14 displacement ton cylinder airframe;  21.5 tonnes;  MCr 19.9
Chassis:</DT>
     29.10 kL cylinder airframe (7.7 m long x 2.2 m wide x 2.2 m high,
wingspan 10 m);  Structure: 513 kg of light alloy, body 0.04 cm thick,
sealed (1 atm), 1 armour rating

Performance:
     4.66 MW TL5 Imp. Internal Combustion power plant;  Fuel: 1.16 kL of
high-grade hcarb (1.16 tonnes), 2 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 4.66 MW high performance aircraft with STOL
capability;  Maximum Speed: 548 km/h, Take-Off Speed: 224 km/h;  Range:
1092 km;  Agility: +3DM
Crew:
     Crew roster: pilot;  1 crew station (0.04 cm of Hard Steel armour,
rating 2)
Armament:
     Weapon                          Damage    Range          ShotsReloads   Notes
     Machinegun, Medium-5            4         Medium         200 coaxial
     Machinegun, Medium-5            4         Medium         200 coaxial
     Machinegun, Medium-5            4         Medium         200 coaxial
     Machinegun, Medium-5            4         Medium         200 coaxial
Communications:
     Subregional Radio (100 W, TL6, SmVcl, MilSpec)
Sensors:
     No sensors installed.
Other:
2.40 L of cargo space


Designed with CSC (software =A9Robert Prior, 1997)

Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 06:12:52 +0000 ()
From: kraehe@bakunin.hb.north.de (Michael Koehne)
Subject: Re: Universal Range Bands

Moin Marc,

> I'm working on a variety of aspects of this probl;em. I would appreciate the
> spreadsheet equations so I can manipulate it. Among other aspects I'm looking
> at are one way accelerations... for missiles.

	Thruster Plate Missiles are near C impact shocks if thrown from
	long distances. IIRC someone mentionened 2000AU as a effective range
	of TPlates. They would not even need a warhead. Thruster plates
	are evil hand waving, so we should reduce TPlates to 666 diameter
	as short range and effectivity downfall like lasers and other
	equipment.

	Ok now the calculation would become more complicated as it would
	involve 2 tables. One for calculating the maximum accelleration
	(or decelleration whichever is lower) based on UWP world size.
	And a second size of travell time based on spend G-Hours. Mixed
	ships with TPlates for orbital maneuver, and HEPlaR for additional
	thrust at in system journeys used at the smaller planets would
	be more common than the "space opera" TPlate in T4.
- -- 
	kraehe@bakunin.north.de			human.is-bremen.de/~kraehe
		  " ceterum censeo MSDOS esse delendam "

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 97 23:34:37 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: Kinetic Energy vs. Momentum

On 08/30/97 at 07:35 PM,  Joseph "Chepe" Lockett <jlockett@io.com> said:

>Just thought I'd post all this, since I'm loafing this Saturday, since
>Great Old One Loren Wiseman had already responded to my post, and since I
>figure the TML needs a bit more of folks admitting when they're wrong. :-)
>I hope y'all found it as interesting as I did.

Yes, I did and even more surprisingly, for me, I followed your explanation
from beginning to end.  ;->

Eris
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 21:03:48 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 

Douglas E. Berry wrote

> >  Jumping down more than 2m shouldn't really take 8 AP to
> >complete, *unless* the person failed the task test for landing.

It does not take any longer to land the wrong way.  Instead this should
just require checking for injury and then getting up (if you live...).

> The jumping cost is so high because I've never seen anybody take a jump
> without hesitating.

I know that you may wish to avoid this form of complication but how
about if you require a determination check or morale roll first (taking
2AP's).  If this role is made they can make the jump for an additional 2
AP's.  If the check is failed they must successfully roll again before
they can jump.  Athletics skill should probably add to this roll to
reflect greater confidence in their jumping abilities.

I assume that the action point costs of some actions will vary for some
alien races.  A race of kangaroo like creatures would not have to check
determination before jumping for instance.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 01:07:23 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: With Sympathy

My Condolences to the British members of both mailing lists on the
death of the Princess of Wales.  She was well liked here in the United
States and will be missed.

Regards,

Harold

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 23:48:23 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Zhodani & Disease

Hello,
>Anyway, *if* the Vilani were so vulnerable -- how do you explain the fact that
>the Vargr (geneered Terran canines) and Zhodani (humans as well) were completely
>unaffected in "canon" by anything like the Plague of Duskir or Terran Biowar
>efforts? 

  They were. Per CT AM4 p.7 - massive die-offs within two years leading to
at least two-thirds lethalities after ten years. Ouch. And this from an
agent designed to be Droyne-specific.

        Steven Hudson

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 02:02:23 -0500
From: David Reed <david@techrefuge.com>
Subject: RE: B5 Release Dates

> This is actually semi-on-topic, because I like the B5 combat system [snip]
> So, does anyone know when anything other than the basic rulebook will be
> released???

Having worked (abortively) with that publisher (Chameleon Ecclectic) on a 
Millenium's End supplement, I could forecast that *never* might not be too 
far off the mark, but more likely two years after the fact.  Not that I'm 
bitter or anything...  Heh.  How long was B5 on the drawing board: two or 
three years?  How long did the card game hold up everything else?  The 
problem is that Charles is unwilling to allow anyone else creative leeway 
in development, his way or the railway.  So we're chuggin' along 
elsewhere...

What is it about the rules that you like?  You don't find the double-die 
wierdness wacky?
______________________________________________________________________

David Reed           | All wickedness is weakness: that plea therefore
                     | With God or Man will gain thee no remission.
david@techrefuge.com |                -John Milton, "Samson Agonistes"
______________________________________________________________________

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 07:59:27 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)

On Sat, 30 Aug 1997 15:30:07 -0700, Douglas E. Berry wrote:

> The jumping cost is so high because I've never seen anybody take a jump
> without hesitating.

Or perhaps it has something to do with Wyle E. Coyote Physics :)

> >Is ME made by "Leading Edge Games"?  If so, I have experience with a
> >watered down damage system of their "Phoenix Command" rules (a la
> >"Aliens" and "Living Steel").  "The Babylon Project" also has
> >excellent damage & recovery rules.
> 
> ME is by Chameleon Eclectic(sp?), and is the best modern day RPG out
> there.. highly recommended to those who like the techno-thriller genre.

Ah.  CE(sp?) is also responsible for "The Babylon Project".  Since I
am not familiar with *both* systems I cannot comment whether TBP uses
a watered down version of the ME rules (like Aliens is a watered down
version of Living Steel, which is, in turn, a watered down version of
Phoenix Command.  TBP's damage and recovery rules are top notch,
however, inflicting temporary modifiers during combat to keep it
flowing, and then applying more permanent modifiers once the battle is
over.  Does ME use a unique 2d6 task system, a zillion character
stats, and a combat system based on a hex grid superimposed over a
character silhouette?

> >What would /your/ one-word answer to the .45 vs. 9mm debate be, OOC?
> 
> .45
> 
> (OK, I can't help myself)  The .45 has a greater stopping power.  In a
> combat pistol, having 15+1 rounds is not that great advantage, putting your
> opponent down with the first shot is the idea.  Even the police are moving
> away from the 9mmP towards .40 and 10mm weapons.

Well then... neither can I!  In combat, 15+1 rounds is actually a
disadvantage because it teaches the shooter that each shot is NOT
precious (and should not be wasted just because you have plenty more).
The .45 is also superior when using military "hardball" ammunition and
has a flatter trajectory, making the cartridge-- and not necessarily
the gun-- more accurate than the 9mm.  The 9mm does deliver more KE to
the target *on average* which gives it a tendency to over penetrate
when using jacketed rounds.  the 9mm wins hands down when using hollow
point ammo, however.  There... I just debated *both* sides of the
argument!



James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 08:44:46 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 

On Sat, 30 Aug 1997 21:03:48 -0800, Peter Newman wrote:

> Douglas E. Berry wrote
> 
> > >  Jumping down more than 2m shouldn't really take 8 AP to
> > >complete, *unless* the person failed the task test for landing.
> 
> It does not take any longer to land the wrong way.  Instead this should
> just require checking for injury and then getting up (if you live...).

That's what I meant :)

James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 08:43:30 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)

On Sat, 30 Aug 1997 15:16:26 -0700, Douglas E. Berry wrote:

> At 12:12 AM 8/30/97 GMT, you wrote:
> >On Fri, 29 Aug 1997 11:10:26 -0700, Douglas E. Berry wrote:
> 
> >So, if Mr. Klutz (6AP-- a *truly* pathetic individual) decides to use
> >_all_ of his APs to run away (a total of 3 metres), Mr. Wayne (21AP)
> >wants to make an aimed shot at him (4 AP) before Mr. Klutz gets away,
> >and Mr. Klutz wins the initiative roll, does the shot take place after
> >Mr. Klutz has run only 2 metres (ie: after 4 AP, the number of APs
> >necessary for an aimed shot) or after he completes his "move" action?
> 
> This is really helping me see that I've got to really expand on the
> Initiative/AP idea.

Like a snowball rolling down a hill...

> When you win the Init contest, you perform your action, whatever it is..
> shoot, run, whimper.. whatever.  Unless you come into the line of sight of
> someone else who can interfere, you complete your task regardless of the AP
> cost.

Ok, now this is where I have a problem with your system.

If it was Mr. Wayne who was planning on running (using all 21 APs) and
Mr. Klutz was the one wanting to take an aimed shot (4 APs), if Mr.
Wayne wins the initiative he should *not* be able to cover 21 metres
(based on your new 1 AP per metre Movement Action) over a period of 6
seconds before Mr. Klutz gets a chance to get his shot off.  If we
allow Mr. Wayne to use up only 4 APs (regardless of what they are
spent on) before the shot he will be much more picky as to how he
spends those points-- specifically, he may choose to immediately duck
around a nearby corner instead of running nearly 20 metres and /then/
ducking around a corner.

> When several people take part in a conflict, their tasks go off according
> to how they did on the intiative task.  I'm debating making it a rule that
> you have to declare what that action will be at the time of the intiative
> roll (i.e. "I'm going to shoot at B") to make it possible to waste
> shots/APs when something goes wrong.

I'd include it, but make it optional.

> >This sounds like it can get quite complicated with a group of a dozen
> >combatants.  You are creating a situation where at least a dozen
> >initiative tests might be needed (even more if all involved have large
> >numbers of APs and they are planning to do multiple feats with them.
> 
> When you start getting up to a dozen combatants, you are beginning to
> strain the system.  At that scale you should start abstracting combat to
> some degree.  When it comes to people with large numbers of APs and
> multiple actions, they'll quickly learn it's better to use those APs to aid
> success and keep a reaction pool, because each time they do something, they
> invite interference.

Perhaps using my original idea of the split turn sequence (up to half
APs now, save rest APs for later) would make a good optional rule for
larger battles.  The initiative tests wouldn't be necessary, making a
battle between 20 individuals take about as much time as one using
your more detailed system and only 8 individuals.

> One of the characters in playtest had 26 AP!  He rarely performed more than
> three actions in any one turn.. of course, he rarely lost intiative rolls,
> and he usually succeded at what he tried.  When he attempted several
> actions, his success rate went down and he tended to get hit after giving
> the enemy several chances to shoot him.

Did this happen because his luck eventually ran out making so many
initiative rolls?

> BTW:  Quick clarification; when you make a to-hit task, you may declare
> that you are firing up to the ROF of the weapon, and divide any aiming AP
> among those shots as you wish.  This counts as a single action.  This only
> applies when all the shots are fired at the same target.  For example, I
> have a rifle with a ROF of 3, I fire all three shots (12 AP), with an
> additional 6 AP spent on aiming, raising my to-hit number by 2 for each shot.

I assume you are referring to semi-automatic fire and not full
autofire?  For weapons that do fire burstfire and/or autofire, might I
suggest a cost of 2 APs per five rounds of ammunition?  I based this
on the fact that all autofire weapons are supposed to use up five
rounds per target they engage and cannot be aimed (according to T4.0).

> >On a related note, would throwing a 5kg+ object count as a LTA for Mr.
> >Klutz?
> 
> Klutzy should be able to throw it in one turn.. I'll add a line about being
> able to any single action regardless of AP somewhere.

(*)except for long term actions :)

Further note: T4.0 states that "aimed fire" cannot be performed by a
moving individual.  Instead of disallowing it, you may want to double
the AP figure for aimed shots if the firer moves at all during the
turn.

James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1766
***********************************
Traveller-digest      Sunday, August 31 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1767



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: With Sympathy
Re: B5 Release Dates
Re: Task Resolution
Re: Task Resolution
Princess Di
Re: Ship Missions
Re: Gateway & Viruses
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1764
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1764

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 08:48:03 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: With Sympathy

On Sun, 31 Aug 1997 01:07:23 -0400, Harold Hale wrote:

> My Condolences to the British members of both mailing lists on the
> death of the Princess of Wales.  She was well liked here in the United
> States and will be missed.

Likewise from the Canucks on the list.  It took me eight hours to type
up a reply to Marc Miller because I couldn't keep away from CNN.
Truly a shot heard round the world...

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 09:03:54 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: B5 Release Dates

On Sun, 31 Aug 1997 02:02:23 -0500, David Reed wrote:

> What is it about the rules that you like?  You don't find the double-die 
> wierdness wacky?

Actually, I think it is possibly the *best* task system out there that
resorts to only two six-sided dice.  The mechanics are a bit hard to
get used to at first because they are so unique, but that will pass.
You get _four_ separate stages of both success and failure, as well as
"Benefits" and "Setbacks"-- all dealt to you using two ordinary
six-sided dice that you don't even need to add together!

:)

Check out http://www.blackeagle.com/catalogbab.html for TBP product
release dates.

James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 02:05:09 -0700
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

Sat, 30 Aug 1997 01:42:48 +0000, Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com>
>But, I also said, and you seem to conveniently forget this, that we
>couldn't agree on which way to fix the problem.

Great, so we agree that while there are people who would make
changes to T4, that idea that skills should be favored over
stats is unreasolved?

>Now, you have a problem reading the real meaning in my e-mails, so I'm
>going to take it nice and slow for you.

OK, this is my last post.  I was willing let the stuff about calling
me a "butt" and such go.  But clearly you are going to keep at it.
All I have ever done is express the point that you can't assume
that everyone supports you in stat over skill.  If you were unable
to understant my point maybe you are the one having trouble reading
e-mail.  If you want to use the fact that I don't reply any more
to pretend you have acheived some sort of victory by driving me
to disgust, so be it.

[More stuff where Kevin posts insults deleted.]

____________________________
Summers@Alum.MIT.edu

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 01:55:56 -0700
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

Sat, 30 Aug 1997 01:44:23 GMT, jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
>> You seem to have an affinity for trying label those who
>> disagree with you as "wrong".
>
>And you seem to have an affinity for taking everything waaaaay too
>personally.  Not everything written in email is a personal attack.
>IIRC, it was you that started the personal attacks in the first place
>(to which Ken responded with his "Why must you always be a butt"
>comment).

I'm sorry, my only point has ever been to point out to Kevin that
his assumption that the opinion he disagrees with is accepted as
"wrong" can't be jutified.  He responded by confusing me with the
previous caster and calling me a "butt" for doing nothing more
than disagreeing with him and you then accuse _me_ of
taking things too personally.  I think Kevin was off base on
calling me a "butt", but I'm willing to let that go.  I am, however,
intent on pointing out that the issue of skill vs stat is a matter
of opinion and not an issue of fact or consensus that can simply
assumed to have been resolved in Kevin's favor.  It is my belief
and Kevin (and you) should have no trouble with my expressing.

To put it more briefly, the idea that skills should count more
than stats is one that has significant disagreement.  If Kevin
doesn't have a problem with that, all he has to do is stop
arguing otherwise.

>Perhaps he should have used the word "incorrect" instead of "wrong".

Yes.  I did let a few posts go buy based on the choice of words.
But he consitently treats not handly skills vs stats as if there
was no way to see it as anything but a problem (for example he
describes and not changing T4.1 as leaving the problem unfixed,
not as taking another view on the situation) and then, when
I pointed out that it wasn't true, the doesn't say "Oh, yes.
I'm didn't mean to imply that."  Instead, he attack me for
for pointing it out.

>You, OTOH, could have considered what he probably meant,n  not jumped
>down his throat, twisting his choice of words for your own arguments'
>sake.

"jumped down his throat".  "twisting his choice of words".  All I
have done is express my disagreement with his view.  Who is taking
things too personally here?
>
>> >It all started when I made a plea to Marc,
>>
>> You can talk about "how it started" all you want.  But what
>> the poll actually measures (to the degree that such an
>> unscientific poll can measure anything at all), is what
>> people are asked.  They were _not_ asked about stats vs
>> skills.  Otherwise I would never have been counted among
>> the 85.
>
>But didn't you ask during one of your previous posts how this
>discussion on alternate task systems came into being?

No I didn't.  I would suggest you keep people straigt before
you decide to start deciding who should be call names and who
is taking things too personally.

>Both polls proved that a significant number of people receiving TML
>had an interest in changing the system.

One wasn't a "poll" it was  call for support.  And even then he
was counting posts that weren't clearly arguing for skill
over stat (in fact, he counted me and I certainly don't agree
witht that premise).  The other poll was not worded on skill
vs stat either.

>Additionally, the two task
>systems that did treat skill levels with more impact than stat
>levels-- KBv2.0 and MT-- accounted for a significant number of the
>votes.

This is an _assumption_ that the votes in favor for alternate
task systems are for the reasons you thing they are.  It is
only one interpretation of what the poll _could_ mean.  In
fact, I like the MT system (and was counted as such), but fo
reasons that have nothing to do with skill vs stat, so this
assumption is at least partially wrong.

But, and this is more important, polls based on those who
choose to respond are a) nigh meaningless anyway, and b)
known to be biased in favor of changing things.


>>Any discussion of flaws was immediately counted
>> by you as support.
>
>This only makes sense.  Perceived "flaws" in the current system were
>naturally "support" for changes.

Yes.  For _some_ change.  Not for _your_ change.

>> I do.  I just don't apply the filter to them that you do.
>
>Yes you do.  While Ken may be slightly biased towards changing the
>current T4 task system (something that he feels KBv2.0 has succeeded
>in doing-- in the most part), you seem to be biased away from anything
>Ken has to say.  Different filter, same distortion.

Hardly.  All I have ever done is disagree on this issue (and only
this issue) and <gasp!> persisit in disagreeing with him and
pointing out that he can't assume there isn't disagreement.
I certainly don't consider his postion as wrong.  It is
a view point that some have an he has a right to express.

>>Mr. Bearden may be "uniquely passionate" about the future of
>Traveller, but at least he is making his voice heard.

Which is what I'm doing.

>You, OTOH, seem to have a personal grudge against him.  Ever since Ken
>resumed posting to the list a week or so ago, you have followed up
>nearly all of his postings with one of your own aimed at belittling
>him.

Hog wash.  I posted one message the fact that there is significant
disgreement with stat over skill and done nothing but reply to
message where he call me a "butt" and "wrong again" and such.

>That type of behaviour belongs in private mail, not here so
>everyone can watch you two exchange personal attacks.

Then one might wonder why you posted your message to the list...

____________________________
Summers@Alum.MIT.edu

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 08:01:22 -0400
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: Princess Di

	Harold's not bullshitting us, guys.  Di in a car fleeing papparazzi
in Paris, driver lost control, boom.

	Will spend day at work developing conspiracy theories and post in
evening.


Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 01 Sep 1997 00:38:30 +1200
From: Andrew Moffatt-Vallance <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Ship Missions

>Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 14:02:24 -0400 (EDT)
>From: CardSharks@aol.com
>Subject: Ship Missions

>I am trying to fill out a table for ship design detailing various ship
>missions.

>Column 1 is the basic mission. Column 2 is a mission modifier.

>Does anyone care to make some suggestions?

>SHIP MISSIONS
>Code	Basic        Suffix
>A	Auxiliary
>B	Battle
>C	Cruiser      Armed
>D	Destroyer
>E	Sloop        Escort
>F	Frigate      Fast
>G	             Missile
>H	             Heavy
>I	
>J	Small Craft  Launch
>K	Tanker       Cargo
>L	             Light
>M	
>N	             Non-jump
>O	             Tanker
>P	             Passenger
>Q	             Non-standard
>R	Carrier      Carried
>S	Scout
>T	Transport    Tender
>U	
>V	             Dual Environment
>W	Barge
>X	Research     Experimental
>Y	
>Z		


  Andrew etc.
    a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz

****************************************************************************
The longest distance between two points is with children.
****************************************************************************

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 01 Sep 1997 00:37:42 +1200
From: Andrew Moffatt-Vallance <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Gateway & Viruses

>Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 01:58:33 GMT
>From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
>Subject: Re: Gateway & Viruses

Please excuse me, I'm currently suffering from my very own form of the
Plague of Duskir (I got flu, not the nasty cold most people call flu, but
proper flu). Also excuse the massive trimming I've done to try to reduce this
to a manageable size.

>OK, I'll grant some of this. But the fact is that the Vilani, if we accept
>your "revision" of canon, had obviously had to have had considerable
>experience with diseases ... and some very nasty ones at that ... through
>there long pre-contact history. This has interesting implications to canon,
>as I have noted -- it means that Terran Biowar agents can be countered with
>Vilani ones, and that the Vilani will be much less vulnerable to Terran
>diseases than the canon-heads claim, as even very simple precautions can
>(and do) prevent infection by even the most lethal of diseases.

Well firstly, while the idea of widespread Terran use of biowar agents was
toyed with, most people here dropped that idea fairly quickly as being
unrealistic mainly due to the fact that the Vilani could retaliate with
nuclear and chemical weapons. Also I have not "revised" canon in any way.
Canon is that the Vilani evolved amongst an incompatible ecosystem.

>>Secondly, again due to spending 300,000 years with out facing any risk of
>>infection, the Vilani failed to develop the neccessary medical technology.
>>When they moved into space, the undoubtedly did encounter many diseases
>>which could infect them; however it would appear that the Vilani responded
>>to these threats by quarantine. basically put, not only was Terran medical
>>tech very good, Vilani medical tech was very very bad.

>But if they have encountered diseases such as that proposed in Gateway
>*before*, then I can see no answer but that they would have *had* to develop
>medical technology. Of course, it all depends on what you mean by "medical
>technology", I suppose.

The question here is, just how many pathogens did the Vilani encounter?
one per world, one per ten worlds, one per hundred worlds, one per thousand
worlds? Unless such encounters occured with exceptional frequency, and
unless the vast majority of such encounters had a high mortality rate and
unless a significant number of these became established Empire wide then the
Vilani probably will not develop significant improvements to their biomedical
technology.

>Since the diseases they encounter would be endemic (and occasionally
>epidemic) on worlds that they wish to rule, and since even quarantine is not
>really viable against a world that you have some wish to rule, then they
>would have no option but to develop methods for dealing with said diseases.
>This inevitably means that they would have to develop disease handling
>technologies that would make them far less vulnerable to Terran Biowar
>agents ... and would give them Biowar agents of their own to use against the
>Terrans. It would also mean that the methods of dealing with such diseases
>would be so widely available in the medical literature that they would be
>vastly less affected than some of the canon-heads seem to be saying they
>were by the Plague of Duskir.

Why not just quarantine? after all there's plenty of worlds out there. If
there is intelligent life on the world, then they would likely be primative
(the Vilani encountered very few technologically advanced races), so their
level of biomedical theory is probably no better than the Vilani. They may
have "native" remedies (such as various folk medicnes here on Earth) which
work against local diseases, but no real understanding of how they work.

>>Thirdly, the nature of Vilani culture made them even more vulnerable. The
>>Vilani lived in very close proximity to one another, sharing many
>>facilities in common (eg eating, bathing etc.) and living in hostel like
>>accommodations. This makes implimenting the basic precautions neccessary to
>>halt the spread of infection much much harder.

>Yes, but you can also take the "slash and burn" approach to disease
>prevention --- one that requires very little technology and which will stop
>a human vectored disease in its tracks ... do what they did in Medieval
>Europe with the Plague; mark a cross on the door and forbid anyone to leave
>until all are dead or all are well. Use convicts to collect bodies of the
>dead at specified times (or use robots) and incinerate them.

Such methods would appear *very* extreme and inhumane to the Vilani, plus
given the Vilani's communial living arrangements, "painting a cross on the
door" means sealing in hundreds.

>Well, as I understand it, there are few (or none) of the really lethal
>diseases that affect humans that are evolved to attack humans.

Uhm: Small Pox, Cholora, Typoid, Tuberculosis. These are all human secific
diseases. Small Pox existed only in humans (which is why we could wipe it
out).

>>Here on Terra, most of the most lethal diseases don't have animal vectors
>>(Pneumonic plague, Cholora, Small Pox, Thypoid, Tuberculosis etc.). Plus
>>the diseases which caused the Plague of Duskir were not the big killers,
>>they were things like Influenza, the Common Cold, Chicken Pox, Measles,
>>Mumps etc.

>Cholera is thought to have had a non-human vector originally, but so far in
>the past that no-one is sure what it may have been.

>The rest are also likely to have had animal vectors originally, but, like
>Cholera, have adapted to the point where direct human-human transmission is
>possible.

Irrelevent, they are now (and have for sometime been) a human specific
pathogens.

>Of course, the plague in "Gateway" has done the same thing. Which, if you
>accept it as "canon", means that there is a certainty that the Vilani have
>encountered something like it previously.

Yes, so? Unless they have encountered it on a stagerringly regular basis, its
irrelevant.

>As for the spread of such common diseases as you suggest being the cause
>of the so-called "Plague of Duskir", well, *if* the Terrans *did* use Biowar
>against the Vilani [snip]

Okay, the biowar idea got dropped a while back, so what we're discussing here
is the Plague of Duskir.

>Given that we know there was often as few as one (or even no) Terrans on the
>occupied planets, then the disease pool for the diseases, assuming a
>reasonably competent Terran medical administration, amongst the arrivals is
>nonexistent. And, if they *do* have a diseases, they also have the
>antibodies in their bloodstream that will enable a vaccine to be made from
>it -- if you allow the semi-miraculous claims for Terran Biowar tech. Even
>the Vilani would be able to handle making vaccines because, as should be
>obvious, they would have had to have previously -- in the meantime,
>quarantine provisions would limit the spread until sufficient doses of
>vaccine were available. That's assuming that you accept the Gateway virus as
>being "canon".

The Plague of Duskir did not start until the RoM when "Millions of people of
Terran ancestry moved to the former Vilani Empire". There is your disease
pool. As to the devistating nature of it. These are human specific diseases.
The Terrans have 300,000 years worth of immunity and the Vilani
immunioresponse system has been weakened by 300,000 years of lack of use.
These diseases will spread like wildfire (they are evolved to spread amongst
resistant Terrans) and the Vilani will die in droves. Assuming the Terrans
intervene (very likely) with vaccinations and antibiotics the shear scale of
the disaster is overwhelming. Terran vaccines are of limited use since they
are mostly attenuated live strains and the Vilani have a high rate of
negative reactions. Remember the Vilani immunioresponse system has been
greatly weakened by 300,000 years without being used; this is one of the most
vital parts of the whole thing. After this long without being used, the
Vilani's immune system is very much weakened.

>>Assuming that the Vilani understood the concept of vaccination and
>>antibodies, which in turn requires an understanding of the immunioresponse
>>system. And since the Vilani had no mechanism to trigger their
>>immunioresponse system on Vland, it would not seem unreasonable to assume
>>that they did not.

>No, the *Vilani* on *pre-spaceflight* Vland would have had no reason to.
>However, the first time they caught a disease on a less hostile -- or, as
>you say, more compatible, world they would have paid attention to the locals
>and *they* would have had some idea (as did pre-modern terrans) of the ways
>to treat such diseases. Since the only way for the *locals* to deal with
>such diseases as were endemic/epidemic *locally* would be to use technology
>(or quarantine, probably both) there would be many planets around the empire
>where the medical knowledge would exist. Then, given computer tech and the
>widespread spread of knowledge, there would be no excuse for what passed for
>the Vilani medical community to become aware of these diseases, how they
>were spread, and how to control them ... after all, the Ziru Sirka was a
>trading empire, and this means there must inevitably have been trading in
>diseases (by accident, as biological cargoes were traded) ... and since you
>are claiming the Vilani would have had no medical knowledge (at least to
>begin with) they would often have sector wide outbreaks of unknown diseases
>that would be traced down to a single planet of origin and probably
>shipments of foods or other exotic biologicals.

You are failing to recognise just how staggeringly complex the human
immunoresponse system is. Sure, early in their history of spaceflight they
probably did have a few very nasty plagues, but unless they encountered a
technologically advanced culture which had an understanding of the *human*
immunioresponse system; or such plague outbreaks become endemic throughout
a large portion of Vilani space, they would not have that understanding.
Terran understanding only came about because these diseases were a day to
day threat for the overwhelming majority of humans. An alien race will not
do, they will not have the same immunioresponse system. The Vilani probably
did have cures for a number of diseases, but it's unlikely they knew just
how they worked.

>Then, of course, we know that at least one world was used by the Ancients as
>a biological preserve and had Whales and other Terran organisms there ...
>and since animals are a classic disease pool for humans, that world at least
>would have been the source of much scientific development. And we can
>reasonably assume that there would have been other worlds where fewer Terran
>animal species would have been settled, and on some they would have
>survived, providing disease pools for crossover.

Again only very very limited pools. Plus Urunishu was inhabited by a
primative human race. So they would have nothing to contribute and just
finding biologically related species would not aid the Vilani's poor state
of biomedical technology either.

>Anyway, *if* the Vilani were so vulnerable -- how do you explain the fact
>that the Vargr (geneered Terran canines) and Zhodani (humans as well) were
>completely unaffected in "canon" by anything like the Plague of Duskir or
>Terran Biowar efforts? The answer -- the same reason that "canon" re Biowar
>and the Plague of Duskir should be seen as Vilani excuses for being beaten
>fair and square by superior Terran technology and tactics ... it's the old
>"stab in the back" theory. Don't blame your *own* shortcomings, blame
>"perfidious Terra!"

Well, the Zhodani were! Plus neither the Zhodani or Vargr had 300,000 years
of degeneration of their immunioresponse systems.

>>Sorry the most lethal biowar agent experimented with was botulism
>>(botulinal toxin A to be precise if memory serves). It does have a
>>lethality of close to 100%. You should read the Stockholm Peace Research
>>Institutes report on chemical and biological warfare to see just how nasty
>>some of the pathogens

>Botulism *toxin* is, of course, *not a disease* ... it is a *poison* that is
>the waste product of a disease. The disease itself is not lethal, the waste
>product/poison is. And the "biowar" agent they made was the *toxin* and
>*not* the disease itself. It really should be classified with "chemical"
>weapons (poison gases and the like) for that reason.

Botulinal toxin (like all the other biotoxin such as sateriotoxin, enderotoxin,
etc) are classified as biological agents. Most bacterial diseases damage via
toxins. Both Anthrax and Plague (in all their forms) kill via toxins.

>>experimented with are (they managed to find a strain of Rabbit Fever
>>[Francisella tularensis] with a mortality rate of 60%). Also antrax was
>>found to be very infectous, just you needed exposure to a high number of
>>bacteria (around 20,000 spores), but thats only twice the exposure required
>>for

>A mortality rate of 60% is not 100%. And such diseases can be limited in
>spread by the same simple measures that limited (eventually) the spread of
>Spanish 'Flu (gauze masks, limiting public gatherings etc.)

Given that Rabbit Fever normally has a mortality of less than 1%, 60% is
damn frightening (remember this is from unclassified material) and Rabbit
Fever can be caught simply by handling infected material. Like Anthrax it
is capable of percutanious infection and is capable of aerosol disemination.

>>Pnuemonic Plague. Oh and by the way, pulmonary anthrax is close to 100%
>>fatal. As to the virus in Gateway, consider Pnuemonic Plague, Incubation
>>period 3-4 days, followed by a fever lasting 3-4 days. If untreated
>>mortality is 90-100%; yes diseases can be that virulent and that fast.

>Yes, pulmonary Anthrax *is* 100% lethal -- its also damn rare and pretty
>damn hard to actually *contract*.

No it's not. Its only less common than cutanious anthrax because most people
catch Anthrax from handling infected material rather than inhaling the spores
(thats the only difference between the two forms). Most biowar research
concentrated on aerosol dissemination of Anthrax which will cause puliminary
Anthrax.

[snip]

>And its here that we will have to agree to disagree, I suppose.

I guess so.

  Andrew etc.
    a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz

****************************************************************************
The longest distance between two points is with children.
****************************************************************************

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 13:26:07 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1764

On Sat, 30 Aug 1997 19:39:30 -0400, you wrote:

>Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 13:33:09 -0800
>From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
>Subject: Re: Why I'm (probably) ditching T4
>
>Michael Koehne wrote
>
>> Moin Phillip McGregor,
>>=20
>> > The level of proofreading displayed in the damn thing displays =
nothing =3D
>> > less than
>> > *either* contempt for the buying public *or* a complete lack of even=
 the =3D
>> > most
>> > minimal level of ability.
>>=20
>>         Like you they have several software problems (the <-> at exampe)
>>         and no time of profreading. eg. use use a mailer called "Forte
>>         Agent 1.5/32.451" and your mailer destroyed your mail by encoding
>>         it "quoted-printable", now when I'm quoting your mail. Its looking
>>         bad. Of course you hav'nt proofread your mail in the UUCP spooler
>>         so you did'nt saw what happend with your mail.
>>=20
>>         Similars happend with T4 material also. ;-(

Well, yes, but the problem with email, as I am sure we all realise, is that you
cannot be sure that what it looks like on *your* screen will be what it looks
like on the screen of the recipient! That seems to be a problem that is
unavoidable on the 'Net.

On the other hand, you simply cannot argue that IG could not have corrected
these problems -- software related or not -- by simply having the common sense
to print some proofs of the pages!

>Yes but Phil is not getting paid to write this email, nor are we paying
>to receive it (except for general Internet service, connect time, &
>phone fees).  Therefore his message should be held to a lower standard,
>as should all of our messages.

I'm sure we all do our best. I do, I know. But, like I said, the fact of life
with email is that it cannot be certain that it will look as you see it on your
screen on the screen of the recipient. When there is a program that will do
that, I will be first in line to buy it!

>My writing for instances usually displays some spelling errors but if I
>were getting paid for it I would make _quite_ certain to spellcheck it,
>proof read it, and have someone else proof read it.

Exactly. And IG *are* getting paid -- though probably not by *me* any more -- to
do *just that* ... and they haven't bothered to! *That* is what is so annoying.

Look at recent RPG releases by startup companies --

* Withcraft (Mymidon Press, September 1996) -- created on a P166 with MS Works
3.1, Word 6.0, Quark Xpress 3.32, Adobe Photoshop 3.04.

Very professionally done, excellent artwork, generally free from spelling
errors, no gross errors such as missing or wrong tables.

* Fading Suns (Holistic Design, 1996) -- pretty reasonable artwork, few spelling
errors, no gross errors such as missing tables etc. Nice artwork in most places.

* Feng Shui (Daedalus Entertainment, 1996) -- Glossy paper throughout, extensive
use of colour artwork, great graphic design. Few or no spelling errors. No gross
errors such as missing tables.

And compare that with "Nexus", their first effort of a year or so previous --
the difference is huge and impressive. If they can get it right, why can't IG?

* Legend of the Five Rings (Alderac Entertainment Group, 1997) -- And note that
this is a licensed product, so the fact that the LotFR collectable card game's
success is irrelevant to the *quality* of this product (excepting that I suspect
that Five Rings Publishing demanded that Alderac took real care!)

Good B&W artwork, colour artwork is OK. Few spelling mistakes, no gross errors
such as missing tables.

* Chivalry & Sorcery #3 (Highlander Designs, 1997) -- Also done on a PC (I know
this for a fact -- an Apple Mac, I believe, for most of the work, but some on a
IBM). Adequate art, unfortunate graphics layout (overuse of a script font) --
but this was somewhat corrected in the GM's Handbook. Not perfect, by any means,
but about on a par with the Traveller product as far as the size of the company
is concerned, and *they* have managed to improve considerably with each release.
Unlike IG.

Look, what I am saying is is that everyone else in the industry either takes the
time and care to get it right pretty much 100% *the first time* or, if their are
perceived flaws in their product, they make extra efforts to improve each time
thereafter. What has IG done? They seem to be incapable of doing anything
correctly -- look, for ghu's sake, *I* did a better job of layout and
proofreading in the two issues of "Dark Star" that I produced than they have in
just about any of the products they have produced to date. Now I don't claim to
be a graphics design expert or a DTP guru, but if *I* can do it, what's wrong
with them?

Either they must have staff that doesn't have the skills (or doesn't care) and
who are not being replaced or properly trained by the management *or* they
regard the customers ... that's *us*, guys -- with contempt and believe that
"any old garbage will sell". I don't know which it is, but it leaves me so
unimpressed that, like I said, they've pretty well lost a customer. And since I
am reasonably well known in my local gaming community and am often asked for an
opinion on this or that game and whether it is worth buying or not, well, I
guess that there will be a lot of other potential buyers who will be looking
long and hard at Traveller products and rejecting those that are flawed in the
ways I have been describing ... and. to date, that's pretty much all of them.
They can't blame the original production team any more -- even the *new*
production team doesn't seem to have a clue.

Phil

Phil
- ---------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU)
Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)
Designer, Standard Role Playing (PGD)

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 10:17:29 -0400 (EDT)
From: Larry Hadley <lhadley@peterboro.net>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1764

> From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
[me:]
> >    Worse, the 5.45mm rounds used by Soviet .22-type weapons are steel
> > penetrators; they have a steel needle core inside the lead bullet that
> > will go through a car and still have enough energy to seriously injure
> > someone.
> 
> A lot of the SKS ammo running around a couple years ago was that stuff.
> 
> >    Almost certainly, they were using handloads or low-power (rimfire)
> > lookalikes. I don't know of _any_ ballistic protection that will stop
> > full-powered centerfire rounds from a rifle.
> 
> Can you say "trauma plates"? 

  Trauma plates are meant to stop handgun rounds. *I* wouldn't like to
rely on them to stop a .303 deer round - even if it _is_ a hollowpoint!

  Most rifle rounds go right through sheet steel of significant
thicknesses.


- -- DLH                                 lhadley@peterboro.net

http://text.peterboro.net/~lhadley/Profile.html

  "Fight to fly, fly to fight, fight to win." - TOPGUN motto.

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1767
***********************************
Traveller-digest      Sunday, August 31 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1768



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

B5 releases
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1766
Re: Why I'm (probably) ditching T4
Re: Boredom and homicidal insanity in Traveller
RE: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)
Re: RoM/Terra TL
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1764
Re: With Sympathy
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1764
Re: Princess Di
RE: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)
Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)
THUDDD: Apologies, explanations, plans
Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 
Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)
Personal Car (TL7)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 10:28:32 -0400 (EDT)
From: Larry Hadley <lhadley@peterboro.net>
Subject: B5 releases

> From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
> 
> This is actually semi-on-topic, because I like the B5 combat system (realistic
> wounding effects, according to my paramedic relatives) and I've heard that
> the starship combat is fast, fun, and feels Travellerish (whatever that
> means).
> 
> So, does anyone know when anything other than the basic rulebook will be
> released???

   The Earthforce sourcebook (and basic ship combat system) were supposed
to be out just after origins, so we should be seeing it very soon. Get on
the B5 Project mailing list (look on CE's site) for info on other planned
releases, as well as a lot of debate. ;)


- -- DLH                                 lhadley@peterboro.net

http://text.peterboro.net/~lhadley/Profile.html

  "Fight to fly, fly to fight, fight to win." - TOPGUN motto.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 14:19:47 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1766

On Sun, 31 Aug 1997 04:59:19 -0400, you wrote:

>Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 23:48:23 -0700
>From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
>Subject: Zhodani & Disease
>
>Hello,
>>Anyway, *if* the Vilani were so vulnerable -- how do you explain the fact that
>>the Vargr (geneered Terran canines) and Zhodani (humans as well) were completely
>>unaffected in "canon" by anything like the Plague of Duskir or Terran Biowar
>>efforts?=20
>
>  They were. Per CT AM4 p.7 - massive die-offs within two years leading =
to
>at least two-thirds lethalities after ten years. Ouch. And this from an
>agent designed to be Droyne-specific.

Yes, but that was prehistoric, almost. Certainly pre contact with the Vilani,
and way pre-contact with the Terrans.

And, in any case, since we know that the Vilani had Droyne within their empire
(they're in Gateway, too), then we can now assume that Droyne diseases are going
to have affected the Vilani as well -- which makes the chance of the Plague of
Duskir and Terran Biowar having ever had any effect even more minimal.

As far as I can see it, it's got to be like I said -- the rumours of Terran
Biowar and the Plague of Duskir being Biowar are increasingly certain to be
nothing more than Vilani racial loyalist versions of the "stab in the back"
theory. You can't hack it against the young and vigorous Terrans? Well, rather
than admit *your're* the problem, make outrageous claims that put all the blame
on the "perfidious Terrans". Sorry, it just won't wash, there are too many
**logical holes in the whole thing
- ---------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU)
Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)
Designer, Standard Role Playing (PGD)

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 97 15:32 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: Why I'm (probably) ditching T4

In-Reply-To: <3406a772.151076@mail.curie.dialix.com.au>

Phillip,

> I mean, didn't
> *ANYBODY* even bother to *check* the proof copies? Or didn't they
> even bother to
> *DO* bloody proofs?

Dunno.
Don't care.
Just don't want to see it again.

Marc, if you're reading this, for God's sake *do* something. What the 
Hell is the point of you, and us, working hard to get T4.1 as right as 
possible if everything that IG and/or the printers get their hands on 
turns into garbage?
They just keep on doing it time after time, and there's no excuse for 
it.
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 17:43:53 +2
From: "RFXn" <mlaakso@utu.fi>
Subject: Re: Boredom and homicidal insanity in Traveller

On 30 Aug 97 at 18:27, Andrew Boulton wrote:

> You actually think they bother to read the books before they burn
> them? Won't make any difference - they're already convinced we're
> child-murdering Satanists.

	No they're not - not anymore that is. We're just wannabees, LARP 
(live-action) gamers do it for real. ;) They seem to get all the 
media attention these days - what's a bunch of people sitting at a 
tabl and rolling dice when you can make headlines with people running 
in dark woods with torches and steel blades!

/RFXn     mlaakso@utu.fi        aka. Matti Laakso
 -Phone: +358-(0)2-237 9928       YO-Kyla 19 A 11
 -IRC: RFXn                       FIN-20540  TURKU
 -Talk: RFXn@delenn.yok.utu.fi    Finland

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 09:47:26 -0500
From: David Reed <david@techrefuge.com>
Subject: RE: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)

On Sunday, August 31, 1997 02:59, James Lindsay wrote:
> Ah.  CE(sp?) is also responsible for "The Babylon Project".  Since I
> am not familiar with *both* systems I cannot comment whether TBP uses
> a watered down version of the ME rules (like Aliens is a watered down

Nope.  ME is all %tile.  The wound rules are very complex, but realistic. 
 One chart for all blood loss, shock, stun, broken bones, etc.

> version of Living Steel, which is, in turn, a watered down version of
> Phoenix Command.  TBP's damage and recovery rules are top notch,
> however, inflicting temporary modifiers during combat to keep it
> flowing, and then applying more permanent modifiers once the battle is

I have B5, but I honestly haven't read it.  Enough to know that the two 
dice (one red, one green), one positive, one negative, or something like 
that, would drive me nuts...  I really should give it a better read before 
I judge it, but...

> over.  Does ME use a unique 2d6 task system, a zillion character
> stats, and a combat system based on a hex grid superimposed over a
> character silhouette?

That part is ME.  LOTS of stats.  The hex grid is new, but the character 
silouette is actually a bad scan of what ME uses.  Low budget.  Heh.  All 
of the wound locations are the same.  But ME is all d100.  Skills are not 
allowed to start over 55 (not including subskill), and stats contribute 
usually about 4 to 8 points in "natural talent" to the skill.  Char.gen is 
VERY weak, IMHO; I like point based, but the whole process looks like it 
was bolted on after the fact.  The background and descriptions are 
excellent, although the artwork has definitely taken a turn for the worse. 
 The last supplement I bought, "Terror/Counter-Terror" was all genre and 
no rules, no gear, just background noise about your favorite terrorist 
groups and mine.  I was disappointed (plus the cover art wasn't up to ME 
standards).
______________________________________________________________________

David Reed           | All wickedness is weakness: that plea therefore
                     | With God or Man will gain thee no remission.
david@techrefuge.com |                -John Milton, "Samson Agonistes"
______________________________________________________________________

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 16:45:31 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: RoM/Terra TL

Leroy Guatney writes:
>Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk> writes:
>>The Imperium reached TL 15 around Year 1000. That means they began upgrading
>>their navy to TL 15 around that time. Some of their navy, that is, because
>>only a few Imperial planets would be able to build TL 15 ships from the
>>start (In 1100 they still have some TL 14 ships).
> 
> 
>Are you saying that this TL15 threshold happened all at once?  

No, I'm saying that they began upgrading their navy to TL 15 AROUND that time.
Of course there is some leeway. I'm also pointing out that it was only SOME 
of their navy that they upgraded to TL 15. 



>>But if Terra's home defense units had a TL of 14 then that is solid 
>>evidence  -  I'd go so far as to call it proof  -  that Terra's military 
>>TL at that time was 14.
> 
>That is one way to look at it, and mine was another.  

But your way seems so obviously wrong to me that if you really think that
your way is a valid point of view, then our premises are so different that
it is hardly worth arguing about it.

>I am trying to have a discussion of "future canon".  I am looking at 
>Traveller background holes (fill more holes, fill more holes, fill more 
>holes, fill more holes) and trying to see what the potential is, where the 
>general (though not unanimous) response has been "There's no hole here."  
>I just have to disagree.

But since the general response has, indeed, been "There's no hole here."
why not move along to some problem that the general response are willing
to acknowledge? As it is, you're wasting your time and ours arguing about
something that we will obviously never agree on.

>>Right. And since the Imperium reached TL 14 around 700 then it makes sense
>>that some planets in the Solomani Sphere was TL 14 too. And the evidence
>>works both ways, of course; if Terra had been TL 15 before 871 then TL 15
>>knowledge would have been available to the Imperial authorities and at
>>least some Imperial planets would have been TL 15 too.
> 
>Well, we know how many TL16 worlds there are in the Third Imperium c.1120,
>and nobody is calling it a TL16 Third Imperium. 

So? We have little idea just when the TL 16 planets in 1120 became TL 16.
Presumably they are mostly borderline cases. If they are not yet geared to
produce TL 16 goods for export, then they can be TL 16 while the Imperium
is still TL 15. I don't recall any references to TL 16 ships in Imperial
employ in the MT sources. The nearest we come to it are some ships refitted
with experimental TL 16 weapons.


>That leaves a lot of room for my interpretation. 

That reminds me of a lot of the postings in alt.folklore.urban. You seem
unable to distinguish between being unable to disprove and being able to
prove. 

However, we are able to prove that Terra can't have been TL 15 in 700, 
because if it had been, all its defense forces would have been TL 15,
propably in less than a generation, certainly in less than a century; 
and we know that in 1000 _all_ its defenses were Tl 14. 

>>>Now if you are telling me that a bunch of Terrans at TL14 can take on the
>>>Third Imperium at one entire tech level disadvantage--well let's just say
>>>that is like the Terrans in their 4900 ton ships taking on 74,900 ton Vilani
>>>ships. 
>>
>>That's not true, at least not by CT combat rules. Steve Higginbotham once
>>estimated that given optimal ship design (not always a given ;-), TL 12
>>ships have a 12/1 advantage over TL 9 ships while TL 15 ships have a 3/1
>>advantage over TL 14 ships (I have no idea how things are under T4 ship
>>design and combat rules).
> 
> 
>Then Steve is in perfect agreement with me.  I did the TL14/15 analysis
>a long time ago and I can confirm the 3/1 advantage.  It all comes down
>to powerplant size as the difference between the two levels.
> 
>I have not done the 12 to 9 numbers, and that size range gets complicated
>there because the numbers I stated above are _MAXIMUM_ sizes for the
>purported TL9 Terrans and TL11 Vilani.  This is using CT High Guard rules.
> 
>So what did I miss in your statement?  It seems that we agree.

You said that TL 15 vs. TL 14 forces were equivalent to TL 12 vs TL 9
forces (actually, you didn't quite; I misinterpretated the Vilani vs. 
Terrans bit: the Vilani are only TL 11, so it would be TL 11 vs Tl 9 
troops, which are only 5:1 odds). 

>>for the combined forces of the whole Solomani Sphere. And in any case, the
>>Imperial forces would not be solid TL 15... or even borderline TL 15.
> 
>Same with Solomani forces.  The game's counter mix bear that out.  That
>just reinforces my point.  If there were few TL15 ground troops on both
>sides, they could have been eliminated much earlier in the war.

But if Terra had been TL 15 for any length of time, then there would not be
just a few TL15 ground troops on Terra. ALL of Terras ground troops would
be TL 15. And so would all its other system defense forces.  
 
>Hans, that is _exactly_ what I have been doing.  As a review, because I know
>how hard it is to keep up with the TML, even on digests.
> 
>                          RoM TL12                                RoM TL15+
>                         --------                                ---------
>Robotics                    x                                       x
>Terraforming                -                                       x
>JumpTech                    x                                       -
>post-RoM Terra Tech Level   -                                       x
>miscellaneous               -                                       x
 
I had a long answer to this (you know, how a few examples of global terra-
forming projects started by the RoM (and finished by the Imperium) was not 
proof that global terraforming had been _commonplace_ during the RoM, etc.) 
half finished, when it suddenly struck me that I was being foolish. There 
was nothing in my rebuttal that hadn't been pointed out to you several times 
before. It hadn't convinced you then, so why should I think that it would 
convince you now? Answer: I shouldn't. So why bother?

Leroy, it is obvious by now that Harold and Andrew and David and I and all
the others won't convince you, and you won't convince us. Either you are
right and the rest of us are too stupid to realize it or too stubborn to
accept it, or... it is the other way around.

In either case, any further attempt on one side to convince the other would
be a exercise in futility, and I, for one, have decided to call it quits.



      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
  "Free speech gives a man the right to talk about the
'psycology' of an amoeba, but I don't have to listen".
                  Elihu Nivens in 'The Puppet Masters'

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 17:59:46 +2
From: "RFXn" <mlaakso@utu.fi>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1764

On 31 Aug 97 at 10:17, Larry Hadley wrote:

> > From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
> [me:]
> > >    Worse, the 5.45mm rounds used by Soviet .22-type weapons are steel
> > > penetrators; they have a steel needle core inside the lead bullet that
> > > will go through a car and still have enough energy to seriously injure
> > > someone.
> > 
> > A lot of the SKS ammo running around a couple years ago was that stuff.

	Think I got something wrong, isn't SKS chambered for 7.62mm x 39mm 
(7.62 Short)? I recall the original AK-47 was designed for that round 
because the Soviets already manufactured them for the SKS. Maybe a 
newer version?

	(disclaimer; the only AK variants I've played with are .308 
Wni Valmet Petra (sold as Valmet Sport in the US in the 80s) and the 
standard Valmet M76 service rifle).

>   Most rifle rounds go right through sheet steel of significant
> thicknesses.

	A 7.62mm x 39mm FMJ penetrates around 7 mm of steel at close 
range at 90 degree firing angle. A 7.62 NATO goes thru around 10mm of 
armor-grade steel - when loaded with AP you can shoot right through 
most wheeled APCs.

/RFXn     mlaakso@utu.fi        aka. Matti Laakso
 -Phone: +358-(0)2-237 9928       YO-Kyla 19 A 11
 -IRC: RFXn                       FIN-20540  TURKU
 -Talk: RFXn@delenn.yok.utu.fi    Finland

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 97 16:45 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: With Sympathy

In-Reply-To: <340f2f4c.53488884@mail.direct.ca>

> On Sun, 31 Aug 1997 01:07:23 -0400, Harold Hale wrote:
>  
> > My Condolences to the British members of both mailing lists on the
> > death of the Princess of Wales.  She was well liked here in the United
> > States and will be missed.
>  
> Likewise from the Canucks on the list.  It took me eight hours to type
> up a reply to Marc Miller because I couldn't keep away from CNN.
> Truly a shot heard round the world...

Thank you.
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 10:33:09 -0600 (MDT)
From: Merrick Burkhardt <merrick@Rt66.com>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1764

 
> > Can you say "trauma plates"? 
> 
>   Trauma plates are meant to stop handgun rounds. *I* wouldn't like to
> rely on them to stop a .303 deer round - even if it _is_ a hollowpoint!
> 
>   Most rifle rounds go right through sheet steel of significant
> thicknesses.

My Mauser (8mm) or SMLE (.303) will easily go through 6mm (1/4 inch)
plate.  I've shot through stuff at least 3/8" by the looks of it but
didn't mic it to check :-)

- -Merrick

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 09:42:01 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Princess Di

At 08:01 AM 8/31/97 -0400, you wrote:

>	Harold's not bullshitting us, guys.  Di in a car fleeing papparazzi
>in Paris, driver lost control, boom.
>
>	Will spend day at work developing conspiracy theories and post in
>evening.

Wander out to alt.conspiracy where we're having a field day....

- --

+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~+
|  Douglas E. Berry       dberry@hooked.net  |
|      http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/        |
|--------------------------------------------|
|  I can please only one person per day.     |
|    Today is not your day.                  |
|     Tomorrow isn't looking good either.    |
|      -motto of Dogbert's New Ruling Class  |
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~+

  

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 09:49:39 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: RE: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)

At 09:47 AM 8/31/97 -0500, you wrote:

>> over.  Does ME use a unique 2d6 task system, a zillion character
>> stats, and a combat system based on a hex grid superimposed over a
>> character silhouette?
>
>That part is ME.  LOTS of stats.  The hex grid is new, but the character 
>silouette is actually a bad scan of what ME uses.  Low budget.  Heh.  All 
>of the wound locations are the same.  But ME is all d100.  Skills are not 
>allowed to start over 55 (not including subskill), and stats contribute 
>usually about 4 to 8 points in "natural talent" to the skill.  Char.gen is 
>VERY weak, IMHO; I like point based, but the whole process looks like it 
>was bolted on after the fact.  The background and descriptions are 
>excellent, although the artwork has definitely taken a turn for the worse. 
> The last supplement I bought, "Terror/Counter-Terror" was all genre and 
>no rules, no gear, just background noise about your favorite terrorist 
>groups and mine.  I was disappointed (plus the cover art wasn't up to ME 
>standards).

I agree that char gen is the weakest part of ME, it drives me nuts when I
get players buying different packages containing similar skills, and
dealing with the headaches.

I've looked at the Terror/counterTerror SB, and will buy it soon, simply
because having that kind of source material will help my Traveller terrs be
a little more impressive.
- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 13:19:09 -0400 (EDT)
From: SemoFetus@aol.com
Subject: Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)

>Not that this has anything to do with anything, just like to point out that
>I'm probably the only TMLer who has been shot with a laser powerful enough
>to burn flesh.

Ha ha!  Not so, not so.  I was shot with a laser to remove a recurring growth
on my knuckle...  So, there! :-)

Semo (the Fetus)

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 10:18:49 -0700 (PDT)
From: Craig Berry <cberry@cinenet.net>
Subject: THUDDD: Apologies, explanations, plans

Hi, all,

As you already know, the August THUDDD has been in limbo for a couple of
weeks thanks to a failed hard drive on my home PC (and its aftermath).  I
had hoped to get things rolling again early last week; however, it turned
out I was overly optimistic about several things.  Most notably, the PC
repair shop took three times longer to get the system back to me than
their original estimate, and they *still* haven't finished data recovery
on my old drive, which they'd promised me the Friday before last.

I've managed to recover 95% of the tools I need to do THUDDD "my way" --
editors, templates, languages, and so forth -- but there's one &*(^% tool
I *need* to get off my old drive, without which I'm dead in the water.
Currently, the repair folk are promising the full recovery tape on
Tuesday.

If this actually happens, then THUDDD ballots (and the web page) will be
out by Wednesday.  If not, I'll scream, sob, then go ahead and start doing
them the manual way, and likely be done by Friday or so.

So, my sincere apologies to all THUDDD participants, both designers and
judges.  This is frustrating me as much as it is you, and please
understand I'm doing everything I can to hurry things along!

I'll update the lists on Tuesday evening about where this stands.

- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
   |   Craig Berry - cberry@cinenet.net
 --*--    Home Page: http://www.cinenet.net/users/cberry/home.html
   |      Member of The HTML Writers Guild: http://www.hwg.org/   
       "Every man and every woman is a star."

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 10:09:17 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 

At 09:03 PM 8/30/97 -0800, you wrote:

>> The jumping cost is so high because I've never seen anybody take a jump
>> without hesitating.
>
>I know that you may wish to avoid this form of complication but how
>about if you require a determination check or morale roll first (taking
>2AP's).  If this role is made they can make the jump for an additional 2
>AP's.  If the check is failed they must successfully roll again before
>they can jump.  Athletics skill should probably add to this roll to
>reflect greater confidence in their jumping abilities.

Since I'm half-working on the morale rules, I may do this..  the fear of
heights/falling is the most common fear in humans, so jumping from a height
of 2m+ can be very difficult.

>I assume that the action point costs of some actions will vary for some
>alien races.  A race of kangaroo like creatures would not have to check
>determination before jumping for instance.

Yes, but I want to model what I know (humans) first, then I'll tackle the
aliens.  When the new aliens book comes out, I hopefully will have enough
info to tackle the Vargr.
- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 10:30:47 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)

At 08:43 AM 8/31/97 GMT, you wrote:
>On Sat, 30 Aug 1997 15:16:26 -0700, Douglas E. Berry wrote:
>
>> At 12:12 AM 8/30/97 GMT, you wrote:
>> >On Fri, 29 Aug 1997 11:10:26 -0700, Douglas E. Berry wrote:
>> 
>> >So, if Mr. Klutz (6AP-- a *truly* pathetic individual) decides to use
>> >_all_ of his APs to run away (a total of 3 metres), Mr. Wayne (21AP)
>> >wants to make an aimed shot at him (4 AP) before Mr. Klutz gets away,
>> >and Mr. Klutz wins the initiative roll, does the shot take place after
>> >Mr. Klutz has run only 2 metres (ie: after 4 AP, the number of APs
>> >necessary for an aimed shot) or after he completes his "move" action?
>> 
>> This is really helping me see that I've got to really expand on the
>> Initiative/AP idea.
>
>Like a snowball rolling down a hill...
>
>> When you win the Init contest, you perform your action, whatever it is..
>> shoot, run, whimper.. whatever.  Unless you come into the line of sight of
>> someone else who can interfere, you complete your task regardless of the AP
>> cost.
>
>Ok, now this is where I have a problem with your system.
>
>If it was Mr. Wayne who was planning on running (using all 21 APs) and
>Mr. Klutz was the one wanting to take an aimed shot (4 APs), if Mr.
>Wayne wins the initiative he should *not* be able to cover 21 metres
>(based on your new 1 AP per metre Movement Action) over a period of 6
>seconds before Mr. Klutz gets a chance to get his shot off.  If we
>allow Mr. Wayne to use up only 4 APs (regardless of what they are
>spent on) before the shot he will be much more picky as to how he
>spends those points-- specifically, he may choose to immediately duck
>around a nearby corner instead of running nearly 20 metres and /then/
>ducking around a corner.

The intention was to model all those times that you *really* try to do
something, but the opponent just blows by you.  Imagine playing basketball
against Michael Jordan, for example.

Klutz is a very poor combatant.. with only 6AP, he is slow and dumb.  He
could well stand there, jaws agape, as Wayne runs past himaround the
corridor.  It happens.  

Now let's have Wayne move down a corridor that has a T-branch in the
middle.  Wayne wishes to move 10m, and the intersection is 5m down.  After
moving 5m (spending 5AP), he reaches the intesection to find Joe average
(14AP) hiding in the branch.  At that point, both players could declare
their attempt to perform an action.

Joe wants to shoot Mr. Wayne, while Wayne wishes to continue down the
corridor to safety.  The Intiative task is then rolled.  Wayne wins.  He
continues on down the corridor (spending the remaining 5AP for the movement.)

Now it's Joe's action.  He declares that he'll will move 1m into the
corridor and shoot at Wayne.  This is *two actions*, and Wayne will have a
chance to make another Intiative task to see if he can duck around the
corner before the shot goes off.

Using examples like Eneri Wayne and Klutzy tend to hide the fact that most
combatants (who seem to average about 17-18AP in my game) are fairly well
matched, and many times you find that encounters are resolved with only a
few Intiative tasks.

>Perhaps using my original idea of the split turn sequence (up to half
>APs now, save rest APs for later) would make a good optional rule for
>larger battles.  The initiative tests wouldn't be necessary, making a
>battle between 20 individuals take about as much time as one using
>your more detailed system and only 8 individuals.

That's something for down the road.  The idea for TACS is to give players a
system that gives a good simulation of very small scale combat.. the kind
found in most Traveller games.

Out of curiosity, how do Refs handle combat when there are multiple
attackers, or when the PCs end up in a combat zone?

>> One of the characters in playtest had 26 AP!  He rarely performed more than
>> three actions in any one turn.. of course, he rarely lost intiative rolls,
>> and he usually succeded at what he tried.  When he attempted several
>> actions, his success rate went down and he tended to get hit after giving
>> the enemy several chances to shoot him.
>
>Did this happen because his luck eventually ran out making so many
>initiative rolls?

That and he ran out of AP.  By moving carefully, making single aimed shots,
and always keeping a reserve of AP, he once took out six Vargr corsairs
with a gauss pistol.  The character is a former Marine, with the stats and
skills to back it up, but it was an impressive use of the system.  More
importantly, the player (another veteran) could use the skills he was
taught in the service in the game and get good results.

>> BTW:  Quick clarification; when you make a to-hit task, you may declare
>> that you are firing up to the ROF of the weapon, and divide any aiming AP
>> among those shots as you wish.  This counts as a single action.  This only
>> applies when all the shots are fired at the same target.  For example, I
>> have a rifle with a ROF of 3, I fire all three shots (12 AP), with an
>> additional 6 AP spent on aiming, raising my to-hit number by 2 for each
shot.
>
>I assume you are referring to semi-automatic fire and not full
>autofire?  For weapons that do fire burstfire and/or autofire, might I
>suggest a cost of 2 APs per five rounds of ammunition?  I based this
>on the fact that all autofire weapons are supposed to use up five
>rounds per target they engage and cannot be aimed (according to T4.0).

That does refer to semi-auto fire.

I'll be reviewing the autofire rules after next week's game.. there should
be quite a bit of it.. hehehehehehe.....

>> >On a related note, would throwing a 5kg+ object count as a LTA for Mr.
>> >Klutz?
>> 
>> Klutzy should be able to throw it in one turn.. I'll add a line about being
>> able to any single action regardless of AP somewhere.
>
>(*)except for long term actions :)

So noted.
>
>Further note: T4.0 states that "aimed fire" cannot be performed by a
>moving individual.  Instead of disallowing it, you may want to double
>the AP figure for aimed shots if the firer moves at all during the
>turn.

For a normal individual, moving and firing is a bad idea because you are
burning AP that you could spend elsewhere.  IMHO, firing should be done
from a stable position, preferably a rest.  The rules will reflect this in
some way.

I'm playtesting rules for using pistols one-handed (+1 difficulty level)
and using rests/supports/bipods (-1 difficulty level) whaddya think?
- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: 31 Aug 1997 19:54:31 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Personal Car (TL7)

Personal Car (TL7)
Designed by Robert Prior

Summary:
     0.40 displacement ton box;  2.18 tonnes;  kCr 15.8
Chassis:
     5.60 kL box (2.8 m long x 1.4 m wide x 1.4 m high);  Structure: 366 kg
of soft steel, rated for 1.0Gs, body 0.02 cm thick, 1 armour rating
     
Performance:
     250 kW TL5 Imp. Internal Combustion power plant;  Fuel: 250 L of
high-grade hcarb (250 kg), 8 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 250 kW wheels;  Maximum Speed: 124 km/h;  Range: 991
km;  Agility: +2DM
Crew & Passengers:
     Crew roster: driver;  1 crew station;  3 cramped passenger seats
Communications:
     No communicators installed.
Sensors:
     No sensors installed.
Other:
     326 L of cargo space


Designed with CSC (software (c) Robert Prior, 1997)

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1768
***********************************
Traveller-digest      Sunday, August 31 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1769



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Model B (TL5)
Corporate Helicopter (TL7)
Economy Aircar (TL15)
Speedboat (TL7)
Riot Control Car (TL6)
Re: Ship Missions
Re: Universal Range Bands
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1764
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1764
Re: B5 Release Dates
CSC Acme Rocket Sled-7
Re: Conspiracy theory
CSC Famille Spofulam Pogo Stick
Re: Universal Range Bands
Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)
Re: With Sympathy
Re: Universal Range Bands

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 31 Aug 1997 19:53:51 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Model B (TL5)

Model B (TL5)
Designed by Robert Prior

Summary:
     0.60 displacement ton open-topped box;  2.17 tonnes;  kCr 24.2
Chassis:
     8.40 kL open-topped box (3.2 m long x 1.6 m wide x 1.6 m high); 
Structure: 479 kg of soft steel, rated for 1.0Gs, body 0.02 cm thick, 1
armour rating
     
Performance:
     200 kW TL5 Imp. Internal Combustion power plant;  Fuel: 250 L of
high-grade hcarb (250 kg), 10 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 200 kW wheels;  Maximum Speed: 74 km/h;  Range: 745
km;  Agility: +2DM
Crew & Passengers:
     Crew roster: driver;  1 crew station;  3 roomy passenger seats
Communications:
     No communicators installed.
Sensors:
     No sensors installed.
Other:
     146 L of cargo space


Designed with CSC (software (c) Robert Prior, 1997)

------------------------------

Date: 31 Aug 1997 19:54:51 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Corporate Helicopter (TL7)

Corporate Helicopter (TL7)
Designed by Robert Prior

Summary:
     0.80 displacement ton box;  2.19 tonnes;  kCr 68.6
Chassis:
     11.2 kL box (3.5 m long x 1.8 m wide x 1.8 m high);  Structure: 290 kg
of light alloy, rated for 1.0Gs, body 0.04 cm thick, 1 armour rating
     
Performance:
     400 kW TL7 Turbine, Gas power plant;  Fuel: 360 L of high-grade hcarb
(360 kg), 6 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 400 kW helicopter;  Maximum Speed: 296 km/h;  Range:
1774 km;  Agility: +3DM
Crew & Passengers:
     Crew roster: pilot;  1 crew station;  4 roomy passenger seats
Communications:
     Regional Radio (10 W, TL7, SmVcl)
Sensors:
     No sensors installed.
Other:
     651 L of cargo space


Designed with CSC (software (c) Robert Prior, 1997)

------------------------------

Date: 31 Aug 1997 19:54:12 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Economy Aircar (TL15)

Economy Aircar (TL15)
Designed by Robert Prior

Summary:
     0.35 displacement ton box;  905 kg;  Cr 3151
Chassis:
     4.90 kL box (2.6 m long x 1.4 m wide x 1.4 m high);  Structure: 55.8 kg
of structurecomp, rated for 1.0Gs, body 0.04 cm thick, 1 armour rating
     
Performance:
     50.0 kW TL15 Fusion Plus power plant;  Fuel: 765 mL of enriched water
(765 g), 100 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 50.0 kW contragrav;  Maximum Speed: 389 km/h;  Range:
38759 km;  Agility: -6DM
Crew & Passengers:
     Crew roster: pilot;  1 crew station;  3 cramped passenger seats
Communications:
     Subregional Radio (1 W, TL15, SmVcl)
Sensors:
     No sensors installed.
Other:
     Safety Features: Roadgrid
     684 L of cargo space


Designed with CSC (software (c) Robert Prior, 1997)

------------------------------

Date: 31 Aug 1997 19:53:04 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Speedboat (TL7)

Speedboat (TL7)
Designed by Robert Prior

Summary:
     0.50 displacement ton open-topped needle;  2.03 tonnes;  kCr 16.7
Chassis:
     7.00 kL open-topped needle (7.1 m long x 99 cm wide x 99 cm high); 
Structure: 115 kg of fiber laminate, rated for 1.0Gs, body 0.13 cm thick, 1
armour rating
     
Performance:
     400 kW TL5 Imp. Internal Combustion power plant, water-cooled;  Fuel:
200 L of high-grade hcarb (200 kg), 4 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 400 kW watercraft;  Maximum Speed: 53 km/h;  Range:
212 km;  Agility: +2DM
Crew & Passengers:
     Crew roster: helmsman;  1 crew station;  2 roomy passenger seats
Communications:
     Regional Radio (10 W, TL7, SmVcl)
Sensors:
     No sensors installed.
Other:
     542 L of cargo space


Designed with CSC (software (c) Robert Prior, 1997)

------------------------------

Date: 31 Aug 1997 19:53:29 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Riot Control Car (TL6)

Riot Control Car (TL6)
Designed by Robert Prior

Summary:
     1.00 displacement ton box;  14.3 tonnes;  kCr 179
Chassis:
     14.0 kL box (3.7 m long x 1.9 m wide x 1.9 m high);  Structure: 449 kg
of hard steel, rated for 1.0Gs, body 1.6 cm thick
     Armour: 8 front (1.6 cm, moderate slope), 7 sides (1.6 cm), 8 rear (1.6
cm, moderate slope), 7 top (1.6 cm), 7 bottom (1.6 cm)
Performance:
     1.20 MW TL5 Imp. Internal Combustion power plant;  Fuel: 1.50 kL of
high-grade hcarb (1.50 tonnes), 10 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 1.20 MW wheels with off-road wheels;  Maximum Speed:
91 km/h;  Range: 907 km;  Agility: +3DM
Crew:
     Crew roster: driver, commander;  2 crew stations
Armament:
     Weapon                          Damage    Range          Shots   
Reloads   Notes
     Water Cannon-6                  1         Very Short     1       50     
  +3DM, remote
     Machinegun, Medium-5            4         Long           200     20     
  coaxial
     Machinegun, Medium-5            4         Long           200     20     
  coaxial
Communications:
     Regional Radio (1.00 kW, TL6, SmVcl, MilSpec)
Sensors:
     No sensors installed.
Other:
     157 L of cargo space


Designed with CSC (software (c) Robert Prior, 1997)

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 20:25:18 +0000
From: Garry Ward <Garry.E.Ward@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Ship Missions

At 06:02 PM 8/30/97 +0000, Cardshark wrote:
>I am trying to fill out a table for ship design detailing various ship
>missions.
>
>Column 1 is the basic mission. Column 2 is a mission modifier.
>
>Does anyone care to make some suggestions?
>
>SHIP MISSIONS
>Code	Basic	Suffix
>	A	Auxiliary	-
>	B	Battle	-
>	C	Cruiser	Armed
>	D	-	-
><snip>
>	S	Scout	
>  	T		
><snip>	U		
>
>

Cruiser makes sense as a category rather than a mission. Same with
Auxilliary and with Battle.
 
Scout is a mission. So is are such things as:
 A Research 
 B Transport, Freight
 C Transport, Passenger, civilian
 D Transport, passenger, military (troop ship)
 E Transport, Medical (hospital)
 F Transport, Mixed (passengers & cargo)
 G Courier
 H Escort (presumes armed)
 I Patrol (presumes armed)
 J Attack or Assault (presumes armed)
 K Defense (presumes armed)
 L Security (presumes armed)


Modifiers would be

A Light (can refer to either armor or weapons)
B Heavy (can refer to either armor or weapons)
C Medium (can refer to either armor or weapons)
D Long range
E Fast
F System
G Planetary
H Deep or Far
I Unarmed
K Armed
J Orbital
L Sub orbital
M Atmospheric


Examples:

Light Escort
Heavy Long Range Planetary Attack craft (sort reference: Battleship)
Light System Defense craft
Medium System Defense craft
Heavy System Defense craft
Deep Scout 
Far Scout
Far Patrol
Light Escort, Orbital (various planetary defense devices)

Garry

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 13:10:04 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Universal Range Bands

In mail you write:

>         Thruster Plate Missiles are near C impact shocks if thrown from
>         long distances. IIRC someone mentionened 2000AU as a effective range
>         of TPlates. They would not even need a warhead. Thruster plates
>         are evil hand waving, so we should reduce TPlates to 666 diameter
>         as short range and effectivity downfall like lasers and other
>         equipment.

The "nice" thing about near c missiles is that they can't manuever
worth shit. So anything that gets any warning can dodge them. They are
only useful against immobile targets (at least until we get drives that
can do multiple thousands of gees).

BTW, I'd not be at all surprised to find that you could build a near c
missile using an ion drive, even though the accel would only be 1/100th
g. 

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 13:14:44 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1764

In mail you write:

>> From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
> [me:]
>> >    Worse, the 5.45mm rounds used by Soviet .22-type weapons are steel
>> > penetrators; they have a steel needle core inside the lead bullet that
>> > will go through a car and still have enough energy to seriously injure
>> > someone.
>> 
>> A lot of the SKS ammo running around a couple years ago was that stuff.
>> 
>> >    Almost certainly, they were using handloads or low-power (rimfire)
>> > lookalikes. I don't know of _any_ ballistic protection that will stop
>> > full-powered centerfire rounds from a rifle.
>> 
>> Can you say "trauma plates"? 
>
>   Trauma plates are meant to stop handgun rounds. *I* wouldn't like to
> rely on them to stop a .303 deer round - even if it _is_ a hollowpoint!
>
>   Most rifle rounds go right through sheet steel of significant
> thicknesses.

I know. But I was thinking of *military* type body armor. They use some
sort of ceramic laminate in the trauma plates. After all, they *do*
have to worry about not only rifle bullets, but shrapnel.

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 13:22:01 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1764

In mail you write:

> On 31 Aug 97 at 10:17, Larry Hadley wrote:
>
>> > From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
>> [me:]
>> > >    Worse, the 5.45mm rounds used by Soviet .22-type weapons are steel
>> > > penetrators; they have a steel needle core inside the lead bullet that
>> > > will go through a car and still have enough energy to seriously injure
>> > > someone.
>> > 
>> > A lot of the SKS ammo running around a couple years ago was that stuff.
>
>         Think I got something wrong, isn't SKS chambered for 7.62mm x 39mm 
> (7.62 Short)? I recall the original AK-47 was designed for that round 
> because the Soviets already manufactured them for the SKS. Maybe a 
> newer version?

Well, I know the SKS uses a different round than the AK-47, but the SKS
ammo has the penetrators too! At least some of it does. 

>         (disclaimer; the only AK variants I've played with are .308 
> Wni Valmet Petra (sold as Valmet Sport in the US in the 80s) and the 
> standard Valmet M76 service rifle).

I've yet to get to *fire* an AK-47, though I've helped clean a
friend's (he's a bit gung-ho, not only does he have several 30 round
magazines, he also has a 75 round drum and a 100 round drum!)

I used to *own* an SKS, but had to sell it to pay some bills. But I get
to shoot one almost every time we go out shooting.

>>   Most rifle rounds go right through sheet steel of significant
>> thicknesses.
>
>         A 7.62mm x 39mm FMJ penetrates around 7 mm of steel at close 
> range at 90 degree firing angle. A 7.62 NATO goes thru around 10mm of 
> armor-grade steel - when loaded with AP you can shoot right through 
> most wheeled APCs.

Well, one of our SKS rounds hit a steel target support 1/8" thick on
the edge. It blasted almost all the way through the width (1/2" to 3/4")

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 22:43:59 +0000
From: Garry Ward <Garry.E.Ward@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: B5 Release Dates

At 02:26 AM 8/31/97 +0000, Rob Prior wrote:
>This is actually semi-on-topic, because I like the B5 combat system (realistic
>wounding effects, according to my paramedic relatives) and I've heard that
>the starship combat is fast, fun, and feels Travellerish (whatever that
>means).
>
>So, does anyone know when anything other than the basic rulebook will be
>released???
>

I have seen a boxed set of ship minitures & rules at the FLGS; but at a $35+
price, it has remained at the FLGS.

Garry

 

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 18:30:31 -0400
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: CSC Acme Rocket Sled-7

	This one speaks for itself >:).  15 minutes of fuel, one passenger,
top speed of nearly 1300 km/h.  CSC *RULES*!  A tip for you CSC users out
there; if you want to use aircraft propulsion systems with non-airframe
chassis, simply select an airfram chassis, add the aircraft propulsion, and
then return to the chassis selection and pick the chassis of your choice.
It gives you wonky takeoff speeds, but hey; it lets you do things like this
:).


Acme Rocket Sled (TL7)
Designed by R.D. Elliott

Summary:
     2.50 displacement ton cylinder streamlined;  17.8 tonnes;  MCr 22.2
Chassis:
     35.0 kL cylinder streamlined (8.1 m long x 2.4 m wide x 2.4 m high);
Structure: 569 kg of light alloy, rated for 1.0Gs, body 0.04 cm thick, 1
armour rating

Performance:
     6.60 MW TL7 Turbine, Gas power plant;  Fuel: 247 L of high-grade hcarb
(247 kg), 0 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 6.60 MW high performance aircraft with TL-7 wheels;
Maximum Speed: 1289 km/h, Take-Off Speed: -2147483648 km/h;  Range: 321 km;
Agility: +2DM
Crew:
     Crew roster: pilot;  1 crew station with ejection seats
Communications:
     No communicators installed.
Sensors:
     No sensors installed.
Other:
     340 L of cargo space


Designed with CSC (software =A9Robert Prior, 1997)

Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 18:33:45 -0400
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: Re: Conspiracy theory

At 17:39 +0100 8/31/97, Dr. Nik Whitehead wrote:
>In message , Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca> muses
>>       Harold's not bullshitting us, guys.  Di in a car fleeing papparazzi
>>in Paris, driver lost control, boom.
>>
>>       Will spend day at work developing conspiracy theories and post in
>>evening.
>
>OK, after 8 hours of watching BBC coverage (I'm still having problems
>believing it) here are a couple of conspiracy theories for you.
>
>There were 8 motorbikes; the one which swerved in and caused the
>accident got away. The rider was in fact a member of SIS (MI6) acting
>upon orders to remove Diana and her 'close friend' to
>
>a) avoid further embarassment of the royal family by her association
>with a family believed by some to be associated with the drugs and
>arms trade (which is of course why Mohammed Al-Fayed can't get a
>British passport).
>
>b) to make it possible for Prince Charles to marry Camilla Parker-
>Bowles without any need for changes to his future position as head
>of the Church of England.
>
>Or how about the rider was in the pay of the arms manufacturers,
>concerned at the effect her ant-landmine campaign was having.
>
>No doubt further ideas will crop up as I continue watching.


	My first idea was that she'd faked her own death; after dinner at
the Ritz she'd dropped a mickey into Dodi's drink, rendezvoused with a
lookalike in the ladies' room and switched dresses, donned a wig, and left.
Dodi, having been _partially_ briefed on the the lookalike switch, leaves
with the lookalike; mickey takes effect, crash boom.

	However, I have no idea as to how she could have drugged the driver.

	My second is that it was actually Camilla.  I've yet to work out
the mechanics.

Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 18:49:12 -0400
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: CSC Famille Spofulam Pogo Stick

	An attempt a redesigning my original VDS Fusion+ T-plate pogo stick
using Rob's CSC.  What I did is simply assume that the rider would ride on
the outside, used a tiny needle airfram chassis, and ignored the "internal
space exceeded" warnings.  In the original, appended below, I'd actually
calculated weights for a pogo stick shaped chassis with a sort of hatbox
arrangement as a footrest/housing for the Fusion+ unit and T-plates.  In
the CSC version, such refinements aren't really possible.  Still, it comes
quite close...


Spofulam Pogo Stick (TL12)
Designed by R.D. Elliott

Summary:
     0.01 displacement ton needle streamlined;  296 kg;  kCr 19.6
Chassis:
     140 L needle streamlined (1.9 m long x 27 cm wide x 27 cm high);
Structure: 45.2 kg of structurecomp, rated for 8.0Gs, body 0.04 cm thick, 1
armour rating

Performance:
     50.1 kW TL12 Fusion Plus power plant;  Fuel: 31 mL of enriched water
(31.3 g), 2 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 50.0 kW thruster with TL-12 spring leg;  Maximum
Speed: 1217 km/h;  Range: 2425 km;  Agility: -7DM
Crew:
     Crew roster: pilot;  1 crew station
Communications:
     No communicators installed.
Sensors:
     Active Subregional Radar (100 W)  Resolution: 0.200 mm per km of range


Designed with CSC (software =A9Robert Prior, 1997)



	And now, for comparison, the original:



>
>
>You can do some fun stuff with Contra-grav and Fusion+. Just imagine; a
>pogo stick capable of reaching orbit if you hotwire it (re-entry might be
>a bit dicey). And just think about how pissed off the Mothers Against Grav
>Cycle Carnage are going to be :).
>
>
>Famille Spofulam Toys & Games MegaBoing Grav Pogo Stick
>
>
>Vol.	Mass	Area	Power
>
>Displ.: 0.016 Td (USP 1-2)	0.222 m^3	-	-	-
>Volume:	0.222 m^3	-	-	-
>Config: Pogo stick
>Dimensions:
>-Handles, shaft & spring: 1.5 m long, .03 m dia. (0.001 m^3)
>-Footrest/drive & battery housing: disk 1 m dia, .22 m high (0.22 m^3)
>-Electronics housing: 0.001 m^3 slab, mounted on handles Struct. Material:
>Structurecomp
>Chassis:	0.05 m^3	0.05 T
>Armour: None; child rides on outside, feet on footrest disk and gripping
>handle Armour rating: none
>Power plant: TL-12 Fusion+	0.01 m^3	0.006 T	-	0.05 Mw/
>Prop.:
>-TL-12 C-grav (0.5T thr.)	0.01 m^3	0.0062T 0.01	0.0035 Mw
>-Tl-10 leg (spring)	0.0006 m^3
>Crew: 1 child, (safety harness provided, helmet & goggles not included)
>Options: TL-12 computer, radar altimeter & speedometer, tassels on
>handles, glove compartment.
>
>Totals:	0.222 m^3	0.0622 T (62.2 Kg)
>Cost: 0.002900 Mcr (2900 Cr)
>
>Operational Acceleration: special: computer controls Contra-gravity drive
>so as to balance pogo stick (within safe operational parameters to permit
>some lateral motion) and to nullify 95% of external gravity field save
>between moment where spring first enters into contact with ground and when
>spring has compressed over 75% (adjustable by parents to provide for more
>or less impetus) of its total travel. Once spring (actually a TL-10
>smart-fluid variable resistance shock absorption cylinder) has reached
>parentally approved maximum travel point, thrust resumes to completely
>nullify external gravity field until spring has reached full extension, at
>which point thrust reverts to 95% of external field.
>
>Parentally programmed safety cutoffs cut drive once maximum parentally
>approved altitude has been attained, and adjust velocity during descent
>portion of trajectory to remain within parentally approved speed limits.
>Other safety features include deadman switches on the handles to detect
>child losing grip, and a safety harness to ensure child remains on board.
>Pogo stick will not operate without harness being attached.
>
>Theoretical acceleration is 8 G's (7.5 or so with child on board). This is
>only attainable by tampering with safety overrides and removing the
>hardware governor. FSG&T will not accept any liability arising from such
>dangerous misuse and strongly condemns the sort of irresponsible mind that
>would contemplate it.
>
>Box: Comes plastered with advisory warnings against tampering in order to
>allow child to reach orbit, advisory warnings against operating near
>potentially hazardous obstacles such as trees, tall buildings, swamps and
>large bodies of water, overhead power lines and airports.
>
>
>Design notes: credit for the inspiration goes to Ross Coburn, who gave me
>the idea purely by accident, and now sorely regrets it. I didn't bother
>calculating the acceleration rating figures; I bet that 50 kg worth of
>structurecomp ought to be plenty strong. I also fudged the volume some to
>leave a margin for error, and didn't bother doing the numbers for fuel
>supply and the glove compartment; they're well within the margin for error
>in the volume and chassis mass numbers. And I didn't bother computing the
>cost of the radar altimeter; this would be a simple device whose cost
>would be negligible at TL-12.
>
>I did this with the beta VDS pdf file I downloaded from Joe Heck's site.


Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 23:43:23 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: Universal Range Bands

On Sat, 30 Aug 1997 05:02:47 PST, Leonard Erickson wrote:

> Here's your answers, plus a bit more. I included ranges F thru I, and
> added two ranges to fill the conspicuous gaps in the range scale. Sorry
> that it's so wide. All figures are rounded to 2 significant figures, so
> don't expect the answers to be *too* exact.

[snip]

Leonard, 

Your numbers appear a bit off compared to mine and previously printed
results in CT and such.  Are you using a slightly more detailed
formula than the one in Book 2 or SOM?

NDI (no disrespect intended),

James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 23:54:31 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)

On Sun, 31 Aug 1997 09:47:26 -0500, David Reed wrote:

>  ME is all %tile.  The wound rules are very complex, but realistic. 
>  One chart for all blood loss, shock, stun, broken bones, etc.

You mean all of these on *one* nice chart that deals with injuries
after combat, with temporary modifiers used until the battle is over,
correct?

> > version of Living Steel, which is, in turn, a watered down version of
> > Phoenix Command.  TBP's damage and recovery rules are top notch,
> > however, inflicting temporary modifiers during combat to keep it
> > flowing, and then applying more permanent modifiers once the battle is
> 
> I have B5, but I honestly haven't read it.  Enough to know that the two 
> dice (one red, one green), one positive, one negative, or something like 
> that, would drive me nuts...  I really should give it a better read before 
> I judge it, but...

You really have to simply sit down with a pair of dice and throw them
a couple of times to get used to the technique (give it an honest
shot).  It becomes quite easy after that.  The only problem is that
the dice rolling is handled so uniquely that it can be somewhat
difficult going from T4 or AD&D (systems that count the values
displayed on the dice and add them up) to TBP, and back.



James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 01 Sep 1997 01:05:05 +0100
From: Bruce E J Lewis <bruce@legend.ftech.co.uk>
Subject: Re: With Sympathy

At 01:07 31/08/97 -0400, Harold Hale wrote:
>My Condolences to the British members of both mailing lists on the
>death of the Princess of Wales.  She was well liked here in the United
>States and will be missed.
>
	Thanks.

	I was just on my way out to Euro Gencon 97 at Loughborough when I heard
about this. I didn't have the appetite to go and play and also run a
Traveller demo then, but when I arrived a few hours later I was glad I did go.

	There were about 20 people playing a Traveller tournament in the morning,
and later I ran a two hour demo for a small group who enjoyed my
quickly-designed short adventure very much. That made the day much more
bearable.

	See ya...


Bruce E J Lewis - mailto:bruce@legend.ftech.co.uk
Telephone - 0956-506527

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 01 Sep 1997 00:43:05 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: Universal Range Bands

On Sun, 31 Aug 1997 13:10:04 PST, Leonard Erickson wrote:

> The "nice" thing about near c missiles is that they can't manuever
> worth shit. So anything that gets any warning can dodge them. They are
> only useful against immobile targets (at least until we get drives that
> can do multiple thousands of gees).
> 
> BTW, I'd not be at all surprised to find that you could build a near c
> missile using an ion drive, even though the accel would only be 1/100th
> g. 

The trick would involve positioning the missile and beginning to
accelerate it during the *Third* Frontier War so that it reaches its
target by the time the *Fifth* Frontier War stats (assuming the target
didn't change hands during the *Fourth* Frontier War).

:P

James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1769
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Monday, September 1 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1770



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)
CSC Grav skateboard
K'Kree and the Hresh
Re: Conspiracy theory
Re: Universal Range Bands
Re: Universal Range Bands
CSC Hovertank-9
CSC Panzer Hovercraft
CSC TL-12 Grav Tank, gauss cannon variant
Re: TL 16 (was Re: RoM/Terra TL)
RE: Traveller-digest V1997 #1762
re: proof-reading
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1768
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1767

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 01 Sep 1997 00:43:02 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)

On Sun, 31 Aug 1997 10:30:47 -0700, Douglas E. Berry wrote:

> The intention was to model all those times that you *really* try to do
> something, but the opponent just blows by you.  Imagine playing basketball
> against Michael Jordan, for example.

Ok. You've convinced me :)

> Now let's have Wayne move down a corridor that has a T-branch in the
> middle.  Wayne wishes to move 10m, and the intersection is 5m down.  After
> moving 5m (spending 5AP), he reaches the intesection to find Joe average
> (14AP) hiding in the branch.  At that point, both players could declare
> their attempt to perform an action.

Must Wayne declare that he is spending all 10 APs on moving down the
corridor, or state something like "I gonna move to here, look around,
and then decide whether or not to continue"?  If it is the former, is
he then locked in to continue moving down the corridor past the
intersection or may he confront Joe by shooting him or engaging in
melee (regardless of whether or not he wins the initiative test?

***need new AP action cost for "ready weapon"***

I still believe that all these reactive initiative tests could get out
of hand:

"A" beats "B" on an initiative test and moves first down a corridor...
comes across "C" hiding in an alcove... another test is made... "A"
wins and decides to keep going... comes across mutually hostile "D",
"E", and "F" at a T-junction... "A" beats "D" and "E" but not "F", who
proceeds to shoot "A"... "A" then completes his move... now it is
"B's" turn... runs past "C" and into "D", "E", and "F"... more
initiative tests are made... "B" barely survives, but not before "A"
tries to take a shot at him with his remaining APs, another initiative
test is made... etc, etc.

> >Perhaps using my original idea of the split turn sequence (up to half
> >APs now, save rest APs for later) would make a good optional rule for
> >larger battles.  The initiative tests wouldn't be necessary, making a
> >battle between 20 individuals take about as much time as one using
> >your more detailed system and only 8 individuals.
> 
> That's something for down the road.  The idea for TACS is to give players a
> system that gives a good simulation of very small scale combat.. the kind
> found in most Traveller games.
> 
> Out of curiosity, how do Refs handle combat when there are multiple
> attackers, or when the PCs end up in a combat zone?

If you mean "if the number of combatants exceeds the number of dice
present on the table", our regular referee used to just decide the
outcomes of the other combatants in his head (friendly NPCs mainly).
A bit sad, really, because it often made me feel that our NPCs had
preordained results in combat that often meant that their lives
weren't as in as much danger (ie: Tia was "badly injured" in her
victory over her three opponents, who are dead).  The only combatants
that really had to worry about dying were the PCs.

> >Further note: T4.0 states that "aimed fire" cannot be performed by a
> >moving individual.  Instead of disallowing it, you may want to double
> >the AP figure for aimed shots if the firer moves at all during the
> >turn.
> 
> For a normal individual, moving and firing is a bad idea because you are
> burning AP that you could spend elsewhere.  IMHO, firing should be done
> from a stable position, preferably a rest.  The rules will reflect this in
> some way.
> 
> I'm playtesting rules for using pistols one-handed (+1 difficulty level)
> and using rests/supports/bipods (-1 difficulty level) whaddya think?

As long as rests/supports/bipods specifically refer to heavier weapons
that need them.  Most PCs will not enter combat with benches designed
to hold their handguns steady as if the whole thing was a test firing
procedure :)

Since one difficulty level could mean as much as a 3 1/2 point shift
(based on the average result on a single D6) in the chance of success,
they should be considered exactly that (ie: +/-3.5 DM).  I'll let you
playtest it a bit more before I comment further.

James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 21:32:51 -0400
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: CSC Grav skateboard

	Pretty obvious; a Fusion+ powered T-plate skateboard.  Volume
figures ignore the 1 M^3 requirement for the crew station; the other
components come out to .137 M^3, which is bang on within 3% or so.  I
figure control would be by shifting of body weight; lean forwards to
accelerate, backwards to decelerate, lean sideways to steer...  I'm going
to try and work up a high-performance uncompensated version now.


Spofulam Grav Skateboard (TL12)
Designed by R.D. Elliott

Summary:
     0.01 displacement ton slab streamlined;  361 kg;  kCr 15.1
Chassis:
     140 L slab streamlined (1.8 m long x 51 cm wide x 16 cm high);
Structure: 9.78 kg of structurecomp, rated for 1.5Gs, body 0.04 cm thick, 1
armour rating

Performance:
     Primary: 50.0 kW TL12 Fusion Plus power plant;  Fuel: 1.56 L of
enriched water (1.56 kg), 100 hours supply
Secondary: 100 kW TL12 Storage Bank power plant
     Propulsion System: 15.0 kW thruster;  Maximum Speed: 75 km/h;  Range:
7471 km;  Agility: -1DM
Crew:
     Crew roster: pilot;
Communications:
     Subregional Radio (1 W, TL12, SmVcl)
Sensors:
     Active Subregional Radar (100 W)  Resolution: 0.200 mm per km of range
     Active Subregional Optical (100 W)  Resolution: 0.050 mm per km of rang=
e
Other:
     Safety Features: Roadgrid


Designed with CSC (software =A9Robert Prior, 1997)

Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 21:20:48 -0500
From: "Andrew Akins" <igor@ames.net>
Subject: K'Kree and the Hresh

A question: What would the K'Kree think of the Hresh?

For those of you who don't have Alien Archives, the Hresh are a race of
intelligent plants.

Now, part of the K'Kree superiority complex has been their herbivore
nature - they simply eat plants. So what would they think of sophont plants?

Your opinions would be appreciated.

+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Andrew Akins                                                       |
| Home: igor@ames.net - http://www.ames.net/igor/                    |
| Work: andya@cms-gt.com - http://www.cms-gt.com/                    |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
| May your villages remain ignorant of tax collectors, and may your  |
| sons be many and ugly and strong and willing workers, and may your |
| daughters be few and beautiful and excellent providers of love     |
| gifts from eminent families that live very far away, and may your  |
| lives be blessed by the beauty that has touched mine.              |
|                    - Number Ten Ox, "Bridge of Birds"              |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 01 Sep 1997 02:51:34 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: Conspiracy theory

On Sun, 31 Aug 1997 18:33:45 -0400, Roderick Darroch Elliott wrote:

[stuff on conspiracy theories snipped]

Can we please take this subject to private email?  I doubt Harold
began this-- albeit off topic-- thread with the intention of
discussing conspiracy theories.  Rather, he did so out of respect.  It
would be in bad taste to discuss wild conspiracies involving the death
of the Princess of Wales on TML.  If somehow her death can be linked
to the Traveller Universe, it would be better to discuss it at a later
time.  Thank you.


James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 22:42:45 -0500
From: Sam Thomas <sinbad@dfw.net>
Subject: Re: Universal Range Bands

At 01:10 PM 8/31/97 PST, Leonard Erickson wrote:
>In mail you write:
>
>>         Thruster Plate Missiles are near C impact shocks if thrown from
>>         long distances. IIRC someone mentionened 2000AU as a effective
range
>>         of TPlates. They would not even need a warhead. Thruster plates
>>         are evil hand waving, so we should reduce TPlates to 666 diameter
>>         as short range and effectivity downfall like lasers and other
>>         equipment.
>
>The "nice" thing about near c missiles is that they can't manuever
>worth shit. So anything that gets any warning can dodge them. They are
>only useful against immobile targets (at least until we get drives that
>can do multiple thousands of gees).

Hmm following this anology would mean current day fighters can never get
hit by current missiles because the fighter can all ways get out of the
way. NOT!


- -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
(c)1997 Sam Thomas  |Email:sinbad@dfw.net|
Sinbad Sam, Owner and Operator of Sinbad Sam's Saloon 
Chief Weapons Designer For Reddkneck Arms and Munitions
- -----------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 19:52:31 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Universal Range Bands

In mail you write:

> On Sat, 30 Aug 1997 05:02:47 PST, Leonard Erickson wrote:
>
>> Here's your answers, plus a bit more. I included ranges F thru I, and
>> added two ranges to fill the conspicuous gaps in the range scale. Sorry
>> that it's so wide. All figures are rounded to 2 significant figures, so
>> don't expect the answers to be *too* exact.
>
> [snip]
>
> Leonard, 
>
> Your numbers appear a bit off compared to mine and previously printed
> results in CT and such.  Are you using a slightly more detailed
> formula than the one in Book 2 or SOM?

I calculated things to a bunch of places, and only then did the
rounding. Also, I used the "correct" value for "g" (9.8 m/s^2)

I *could* re-run the sheet with more detail (like the exact value of
the AU), but that's probably overkill.

The formula was:

T=2*sqrt(D/A)

Remember, we are figuring for *half* the distance, then doubling the
result. That give the above formula instead of the one for a steady
acceleration: 

T=sqrt(2*D/A)

Also, I did the rounding on the *times*, and that works a bit different
for H:M:S than for decimals. The spreadsheet automatically converts
decimals to HH:MM:SS.

If folks can handle SYLK files, I'll post the spreadsheet.

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 22:51:54 -0500
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: CSC Hovertank-9

	A TL-9 hovertank.  Provides PCMP-14-hit survivability to the crew.
Generally big, heavily armed and armoured.


Hovertank (TL9)
Designed by R.D. Elliott

Summary:
     11.00 displacement ton wedge streamlined;  185 tonnes;  MCr 17.3
Chassis:
     154 kL wedge streamlined (16 m long x 6.7 m wide x 4.3 m high);
Structure: 2.08 tonnes of composite laminate, rated for 1.0Gs, body 0.50 cm
thick, sealed to 1 atm
     Armour: 21 front (15 cm, radical slope), 18 sides (12 cm, moderate
slope), 17 rear (10 cm, moderate slope), 15 top (10 cm), 15 bottom (10 cm);
Stealth Structure: -3DM against TL9- military and TL10- civilian sensors
Performance:
     9.12 MW TL8 Turbine, MHD power plant;  Fuel: 16.4 kL of high-grade
hcarb (16.4 tonnes), 18 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 9.10 MW hoverskirt;  Maximum Speed: 106 km/h;
Range: 1909 km;  Agility: +3DM
Crew:
     Crew roster: driver, gunner;  2 crew stations (15 cm of Light
Composite armour, rating 14)
Armament:
     Weapon                Damage    Range          Shots    Reloads   Notes
     Autocannon, RF Lt-8   9         Long           1000              1 gunn=
er
     Cannon, Heavy-8       19 (17 expVery Long      1       50        coaxia=
l
     Missile, AT-8         33 (21 expShort          1       3         coaxia=
l
     Missile, AA-8         22 exp    Long           1       3         coaxia=
l
Communications:
     Subcontinental Radio (10.00 kW, TL9, MilSpec, DirAnt, DirFnd)
     Regional Maser (1.00 kW, TL9, SmVcl, MilSpec)
     Subregional Jammer (100 W, TL9, MilSpec, DirAnt, DirFnd)
Sensors:
     Active Subregional Optical (100 W, MilSpec)  Resolution: 5.0 mm per km
of range
     Passive Regional Radar (10 W, MilSpec)  Resolution: 2.0 cm per km of ra=
nge
     Active Regional Radar (1.00 kW, MilSpec)  Resolution: 2.0 cm per km of
range
     Active Subregional Jammer (100 W, MilSpec)  Resolution: 2.0 cm per km
of range
Other:
     Safety Features: anti-hijack system, anti-theft system, fire
suppression system
     696 L of cargo space


Designed with CSC (software =A9Robert Prior, 1997)

Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 22:32:34 -0500
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: CSC Panzer Hovercraft

	Dunno whether anyone here read _Hardwired_ by Walter Jon Williams.
If not, here's a TL-9 armoured and armed hovercraft used for cross-country
smuggling of low-volume high-value cargoes, or just shooting things and
breaking people, joyriding through parks and shopping malls, making the
National Guard earn their keep, parking wherever you want to, and generally
terrorizing your players.  The armour is enough to stop small arms up to
aircraft autocannon levels, it does 187 kph flat out, and packs a nastyish
turret-mounted weapons suite.




Panzer Hovercraft (TL9)
Designed by R.D. Elliott

Summary:
     6.50 displacement ton wedge streamlined;  59.4 tonnes;  MCr 2.53
Chassis:
     91.0 kL wedge streamlined (13 m long x 5.6 m wide x 3.6 m high);
Structure: 1.47 tonnes of composite laminate, rated for 1.0Gs, body 0.50 cm
thick, sealed to 1 atm
     Armour: 10 front (3.0 cm, radical slope), 8 sides (2.0 cm, moderate
slope), 8 rear (2.0 cm, moderate slope), 7 top (2.0 cm), 6 bottom (1.5 cm);
Stealth Structure: -3DM against TL9- military and TL10- civilian sensors
Performance:
     6.51 MW TL8 Turbine, MHD power plant;  Fuel: 11.7 kL of high-grade
hcarb (11.7 tonnes), 18 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 6.50 MW hoverskirt;  Maximum Speed: 187 km/h;
Range: 3368 km;  Agility: +3DM
Crew:
     Crew roster: driver, gunner;  2 crew stations (3.0 cm of Light
Composite armour, rating 8)
Armament:
     Weapon                Damage    Range          Shots    Reloads   Notes
     Autocannon, RF Lt-8   9         Long           1000              1 gunner
     Missile, AA-8         22 exp    Long           1       5         coaxial
     Missile, AT-8         33 (21 expShort          1       3         coaxial
     Machinegun, Medium-8  5         Long           200               coaxial
Communications:
     Subcontinental Radio (10.00 kW, TL9, MilSpec, DirAnt, DirFnd)
     Regional Maser (1.00 kW, TL9, SmVcl, MilSpec)
     Subregional Jammer (100 W, TL9, MilSpec, DirAnt, DirFnd)
Sensors:
     Active Subregional Optical (100 W, MilSpec)  Resolution: 5.0 mm per km
of range
     Passive Regional Radar (10 W, MilSpec)  Resolution: 2.0 cm per km of ra=
nge
     Active Regional Radar (1.00 kW, MilSpec)  Resolution: 2.0 cm per km of
range
     Active Subregional Jammer (100 W, MilSpec)  Resolution: 2.0 cm per km
of range
Other:
     Safety Features: anti-hijack system, anti-theft system, fire
suppression system
     1.99 kL of cargo space


Designed with CSC (software =A9Robert Prior, 1997)

Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 23:19:34 -0500
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: CSC TL-12 Grav Tank, gauss cannon variant

	TSIA.  Will try for a plasma-armed version at some point but right
now I'm going to bed.


Grav Tank (TL12)
Designed by R.D. Elliott

Summary:
     7.00 displacement ton wedge streamlined;  251 tonnes;  MCr 32.8
Chassis:
     98.0 kL wedge streamlined (14 m long x 5.7 m wide x 3.7 m high);
Structure: 2.06 tonnes of structurecomp, rated for 4.0Gs, body 1.0 cm
thick, sealed to 1 atm
     Armour: 34 front (15 cm, radical slope), 28 sides (12 cm, moderate
slope), 22 rear (8.0 cm), 22 top (8.0 cm), 22 bottom (8.0 cm);  Stealth
Structure: -3DM against TL12- military and TL13- civilian sensors
Performance:
     27.8 MW TL12 Fusion Plus power plant;  Fuel: 1.04 kL of enriched water
(1.04 tonnes), 120 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 24.4 MW thruster;  Maximum Speed: 333 km/h;  Range:
39874 km;  Agility: -1DM
Crew:
     Crew roster: pilot, Gunner, Commo;  3 crew stations (1.0 cm of
Superdense armour, rating 11)
Armament:
 Weapon                  Damage    Range          Shots    Reloads   Notes
 Cannon, Heavy Gauss-12  27        Subregional    5       120       +6DM,
remote
     Machinegun, RF-11   9         Long           3000              coaxial
     Laser, RF PD-12     3         Short                  10        +6DM,
remote
     Laser, RF PD-12     3         Short                  10        +6DM,
remote
Communications:
     Continental Radio (100 kW, TL12, MilSpec, DirAnt, DirFnd)
     Subcontinental Laser (10.00 kW, TL12, SmVcl, MilSpec)
     Orbital Maser (1.00 MW, TL12, SmVcl, MilSpec)
     Regional Jammer (1.00 kW, TL12, MilSpec, DirAnt, DirFnd)
Sensors:
     Active Regional Gravitic (2.00 kW, MilSpec, DispArray, MultArray)
Resolution: 5.0 mm per km of range
     Passive Regional Gravitic (20 W, MilSpec, DispArray, MultArray)
Resolution: 5.0 mm per km of range
     Active Regional Lidar (1.00 kW, MilSpec)  Resolution: 0.050 mm per km
of range
     Passive Subcontinental Nuclear (100 W, MilSpec)  Resolution: 1.0 mm
per km of range
     Passive Subcontinental Radar (100 W, MilSpec)  Resolution: 0.200 mm
per km of range
     Active Subcontinental Radar (20.0 kW, MilSpec, DispArray, MultArray)
Resolution: 0.020 mm per km of range
     Active Regional Jammer (1.00 kW, MilSpec)  Resolution: 0.200 mm per km
of range
Other:
     92.3 L of cargo space


Designed with CSC (software =A9Robert Prior, 1997)

Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 21:55:41 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Re: TL 16 (was Re: RoM/Terra TL)

Hans Rancke-Madsen wrote

> Leroy Guatney writes:

> >>Right. And since the Imperium reached TL 14 around 700 then it makes sense
> >>that some planets in the Solomani Sphere was TL 14 too. And the evidence
> >>works both ways, of course; if Terra had been TL 15 before 871 then TL 15
> >>knowledge would have been available to the Imperial authorities and at
> >>least some Imperial planets would have been TL 15 too.
> > 
> >Well, we know how many TL16 worlds there are in the Third Imperium c.1120,
> >and nobody is calling it a TL16 Third Imperium. 
> 
> So? We have little idea just when the TL 16 planets in 1120 became TL 16.

The DGP Data was called the Second Survey Data.  Canonically the Second
Survey was finished by about 1067, therefore these worlds must have
become TL 16 before 1067 for them to have showed up as TL 16 in the
Second Survey data.

> Presumably they are mostly borderline cases. If they are not yet geared to
> produce TL 16 goods for export, then they can be TL 16 while the Imperium
> is still TL 15. I don't recall any references to TL 16 ships in Imperial
> employ in the MT sources. The nearest we come to it are some ships refitted
> with experimental TL 16 weapons.

Conspiratorial Traveller will tell you that the fact that they do not
show up does not mean they did not exist. It could be sort of a "The TL
16 ships are out there, Scully." situation :)

The real problem with TL 16 ships may very well be that there is no real
place to get them _fixed_.

Regency Sourcebook also points out that (in TNE) TL 16 ships have little
advantage over TL 15 ships, this is a further incentive not to produce
them.

In my Third Imperium the Imperium has a few top secret experimental TL
17 ships with antimatter power plants being produced at the Tl 16
Depot?deneb which (in my Third Imperium) has Tl 19 for its Space
Transport TL.

> But if Terra had been TL 15 for any length of time, then there would not be
> just a few TL15 ground troops on Terra. ALL of Terras ground troops would
> be TL 15. And so would all its other system defense forces.  

Well actually they could have had a High Common TL of 15 but had a Heavy
Military TL of 14.  Then a Tl 15 planet would be producing TL 14
troops.  I am not saying they were TL 15 but (using World Builders
Handbook) a world can quite easily have military forces at a TL
different from their High Common Tech Level, Terra could have been one
of these planets.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 09:35:46 +0100
From: "Harker, Mike" <mike.harker@ntu.ac.uk>
Subject: RE: Traveller-digest V1997 #1762

At the risk of being "stood on". A couple of suggestions to reduce
problems in the T4 task system.

a) High Int/Edu characters with low skill levels beating lower Int/Edu
characters with high skills.

Redress this by attaching an "Int penalty" for a low skill, eg Skill
level 1 = -4 , level 2 = -2 level 3+ = 0.

For example, Biological Research. Smith, Int 11 Biology-1 and Jones, Int
8 and Biology-3 
Target numbers are Smith (11-4)+1=8 and Jones 8+3=11. This reflects the
fact that Smith has the greater mental horsepower but just doesn't have
the experience and background knowledge to bring it to bear. If Smith
acquires the same level of training as Jones he'll be the better
Biologist. An alternative version of this is to only apply the penalties
 to skills outside the characters specific career.

This problem has arisen because Traveller groups all the ways to be
clever into one category, in reality there are a great many ways to be
clever ( artist, mathematician etc ) and conversely a great many ways to
be STOOPID! As someone who uses Multivariate Data Analysis techniques to
model social systems I've learned that the simpler a model becomes the
more approximate it is.  I can't see any way around this without making
the T4 system inherently more complex, which I think should be avoided.

b) If you really think tasks are too easy, surely the easiest thing to
do is to "shift-up" the number of dice used - After a little rough work
I suggest that an increase of 1/2D6 would be reasonable - eg 2.5D6 to 3
, 3 to 3.5D6.

Mike.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 10:34:14 +0100
From: Timothy.Collinson@solent.ac.uk
Subject: re: proof-reading

Phil wrote:

>thereafter. What has IG done? They seem to be incapable of doing anything
>correctly -- look, for ghu's sake, *I* did a better job of layout and
>proofreading in the two issues of "Dark Star" that I produced than they =
>have in just about any of the products they have produced to date. Now I
don't =
>claim to be a graphics design expert or a DTP guru, but if *I* can do it,
what's =
>wrong with them?

Hear, hear!  Phil did well with Dark Star (when's the next?  My fiver's
burning a hole in my pocket or do I gather from your frustration that there
won't be any more?)


This is what is so frustrating with the IG books.

I produce 20 (sometimes 24) pages of A5 (LBB size) magazine *monthly* and
singlehandedly.  If there are 2 or three typos in the whole thing I'm
irritated.  If there's a missing table I go into deep depression and
self-mortification for the whole month.  (In five years of producing these
things, I've maybe missed two tables and lost one article.)

It's called proof-reading.  It's hard work, takes a fine eye for detail and
can be frustrating when you think it's right and there's still an error.
But it's necessary in order not to wind up your readers and make them think
that the work you do is anything less than 'professional'.  I do my work as
a volunteer, IG are being paid for their ventures.  Which is more
'professional'?

Now if that kind of trouble can be taken for a monthly magazine that gets
binned after reading, how much more care should IG take for something they
*know* folk are (or were) going to treasure for years?


tc
"Not often so irked and very, very aware that BITS has just published his
bibliography and that IG and TML may yet have the last laugh!"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 01 Sep 1997 09:50:04 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1768

On Sun, 31 Aug 1997 16:15:16 -0400, you wrote:

>Date: Sun, 31 Aug 97 15:32 BST-1
>From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
>Subject: Re: Why I'm (probably) ditching T4
>
>In-Reply-To: <3406a772.151076@mail.curie.dialix.com.au>
>
>Phillip,
>
>> I mean, didn't
>> *ANYBODY* even bother to *check* the proof copies? Or didn't they
>> even bother to
>> *DO* bloody proofs?
>
>Dunno.
>Don't care.
>Just don't want to see it again.

>Marc, if you're reading this, for God's sake *do* something. What the=20
>Hell is the point of you, and us, working hard to get T4.1 as right as=20
>possible if everything that IG and/or the printers get their hands on=20
>turns into garbage?
>They just keep on doing it time after time, and there's no excuse for=20
>it.

Hear! Hear!
- ---------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU)
Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)
Designer, Standard Role Playing (PGD)

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 01 Sep 1997 09:48:26 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1767

On Sun, 31 Aug 1997 10:16:24 -0400, you wrote:

>Date: Mon, 01 Sep 1997 00:37:42 +1200
>From: Andrew Moffatt-Vallance <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
>Subject: Re: Gateway & Viruses
>
>>Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 01:58:33 GMT
>>From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
>>Subject: Re: Gateway & Viruses
>
>Please excuse me, I'm currently suffering from my very own form of the
>Plague of Duskir (I got flu, not the nasty cold most people call flu, =
but
>proper flu). Also excuse the massive trimming I've done to try to reduce=
 this
>to a manageable size.
>
>>OK, I'll grant some of this. But the fact is that the Vilani, if we =
accept
>>your "revision" of canon, had obviously had to have had considerable
<snip>
>Well firstly, while the idea of widespread Terran use of biowar agents =
was
>toyed with, most people here dropped that idea fairly quickly as being
>unrealistic mainly due to the fact that the Vilani could retaliate with
>nuclear and chemical weapons. Also I have not "revised" canon in any =
way.
>Canon is that the Vilani evolved amongst an incompatible ecosystem.

Errm, this is news to me! I raised this issue some considerable time ago =
and was
howled down by the canon-heads (not necessarily you) who claimed that =
Biowar
and/or the Plague of Duskir was *the* reason for Terran victory (or =
pretty close
to that, anyway) -- we're talking last year, here.

And, as I understand it, "canon" as per Solomani & Aslan supplement is =
that this
was a key factor -- implied if not stated outright therein (or so the
canon-heads at the time claimed -- Rats & Cats might as well not have =
existed as
far as Oz was concerned ... even collectors that are *far* more serious =
than I
never even knew it existed in fact!)

>>But if they have encountered diseases such as that proposed in Gateway
>>*before*, then I can see no answer but that they would have *had* to =
develop
>>medical technology. Of course, it all depends on what you mean by =
"medical
>>technology", I suppose.
>
>The question here is, just how many pathogens did the Vilani encounter?
>one per world, one per ten worlds, one per hundred worlds, one per =
thousand
>worlds? Unless such encounters occured with exceptional frequency, and
>unless the vast majority of such encounters had a high mortality rate =
and
>unless a significant number of these became established Empire wide then=
 the
>Vilani probably will not develop significant improvements to their =
biomedical
>technology.

The way the situation is referred to in Gateway implies that it is a reasonably
frequent occurrence. And the Droyne were (as per Zho sourcebook) possessed of
enough similarity that Biowar agents aimed at them were *extremely* lethal to
them -- and they were encountered regularly by the Vilani (and are on one of the
planets in Gateway -- and were there under the Ziru Sirka) -- so we can assume
that Droyne diseases would have had similar crossover to Vilani.

Then there's all those other "minor" human races -- we can assume that some at
least had bugs that were benign to them but not too friendly to the Vilani; and
on some of the worlds (there was one that had many Terran species, a Ancient
Zoo, in effect) there would be other Terran organisms ... and since animals are
the source of many human pathogens originally, the Vilani would have encountered
them before. Then there's the Zho -- and the Vargr ... who, after all, are
Terran stock and would have bugs that would be possibly nasty to the Vilani.

They must inevitably have had many such encounters, as I suggested.=20

>>Since the diseases they encounter would be endemic (and occasionally
>>epidemic) on worlds that they wish to rule, and since even quarantine is not
>>really viable against a world that you have some wish to rule, then they
>>would have no option but to develop methods for dealing with said diseases.
>>This inevitably means that they would have to develop disease handling
>>technologies that would make them far less vulnerable to Terran Biowar
>>agents ... and would give them Biowar agents of their own to use against the
>>Terrans. It would also mean that the methods of dealing with such diseases
>>would be so widely available in the medical literature that they would be
>>vastly less affected than some of the canon-heads seem to be saying they
>>were by the Plague of Duskir.
>
>Why not just quarantine? after all there's plenty of worlds out there. If
>there is intelligent life on the world, then they would likely be primative

Indeed, why have an Interstellar Empire at all and effectively quarantine
*yourself*. Sort of counterproductive, though.

>(the Vilani encountered very few technologically advanced races), so their
>level of biomedical theory is probably no better than the Vilani. They may

But they will need to develop more sophisticated technologies and, unlike the
Vilani on Vland itself, *they* will have good reason to do so. And this
expertise will be collected and recorded by the AAB ... and, when there are
inevitable outbreaks elsewhere in the Sector, these records will be consulted.
There is no way that you can have an empire like the Ziru Sirka and not have
some sort of policy for such situations, even if they happen *relatively*
rarely.

>have "native" remedies (such as various folk medicnes here on Earth) which
>work against local diseases, but no real understanding of how they work.

And, as they advance in technical sophistication, they will develop better
understanding ... after all, the Germ theory of disease is a TL3 or 4
development, and vaccination is even earlier.

>>Yes, but you can also take the "slash and burn" approach to disease
>>prevention --- one that requires very little technology and which will stop
>>a human vectored disease in its tracks ... do what they did in Medieval
>>Europe with the Plague; mark a cross on the door and forbid anyone to leave
>>until all are dead or all are well. Use convicts to collect bodies of the
>>dead at specified times (or use robots) and incinerate them.
>
>Such methods would appear *very* extreme and inhumane to the Vilani, plus
>given the Vilani's communial living arrangements, "painting a cross on the
>door" means sealing in hundreds.

So? Is civil society a mutual suicide pact? Do the majority agree to die simply
because they cannot preotect a minority from a dread disease? Of course, this
probably explains the idiocy of the Imperial attitude to Data Protection that
led (so GDW -- with no understanding of computers at all on staff, so it seems)
would have led us to believe with Virus.

There is nothing in my understanding of Vilani society that precludes them
coming to a realisation that, sometimes, the few simply have to be sacrificed
for the safety of the many.

>>Well, as I understand it, there are few (or none) of the really lethal
>>diseases that affect humans that are evolved to attack humans.
>
>Uhm: Small Pox, Cholora, Typoid, Tuberculosis. These are all human secific
>diseases. Small Pox existed only in humans (which is why we could wipe it
>out).

As I noted, and you seem to have deleted (or it may have been in a separate
post), Cholera is certain to have originated in an animal or insect host in the
Ganges watershed in India before mutating into a form that can cross from human
to human; Smallpox seems to have similar origins, also in India; Typhoid ditto.

Granted, *Smallpox* existed only in humans, just as Swine Flu exists only in
Pigs -- but the origins of Smallpox are certainly in an animal disease, just as
Swine Flu mutated (and still continues to do so regularly) into Influenza.
Genetic typing of Spanish Flu samples show that it was a mutant of Swine =46lu
rather than a mutant form of Influenza.

Like I said, animals are the source of the majority (probably all) of the
serious human diseases.

>>>Here on Terra, most of the most lethal diseases don't have animal vectors
>>>(Pneumonic plague, Cholora, Small Pox, Thypoid, Tuberculosis etc.). Plus
>>>the diseases which caused the Plague of Duskir were not the big killers,
>>>they were things like Influenza, the Common Cold, Chicken Pox, Measles,
>>>Mumps etc.
>
>>Cholera is thought to have had a non-human vector originally, but so far in
>>the past that no-one is sure what it may have been.
>
>>The rest are also likely to have had animal vectors originally, but, like
>>Cholera, have adapted to the point where direct human-human transmission is
>>possible.
>
>Irrelevent, they are now (and have for sometime been) a human specific
>pathogens.

No, for the purposes of our argument it is *not* irrelevant. Since animals were
the origin and pretty much only a problem when domesticated (you need a certain
population density for the crossover to occur in most cases), which implies a
certain level of civilisation, then any contact with any civilisation above
TL0-1 would expose the Vilani to the possibility of such effects. And the local
populace are almost certainly already affected. This means that the disease
regime of the Vilani would have been widespread -- though probably not as
widespread as that of Terra.

And that *is* what we seem to be at odds over.

>>Of course, the plague in "Gateway" has done the same thing. Which, if you
>>accept it as "canon", means that there is a certainty that the Vilani have
>>encountered something like it previously.
>
>Yes, so? Unless they have encountered it on a stagerringly regular basis, its
>irrelevant.

And they could not have avoided doing so regularly enough to know how to handle
it.

>>As for the spread of such common diseases as you suggest being the cause
>>of the so-called "Plague of Duskir", well, *if* the Terrans *did* use Biowar
>>against the Vilani [snip]
>
>Okay, the biowar idea got dropped a while back, so what we're discussing here
>is the Plague of Duskir.

Well, as I said, I missed that one. It's a huge change from the position that
was argued as recently as last year!

>>Given that we know there was often as few as one (or even no) Terrans on the
>>occupied planets, then the disease pool for the diseases, assuming a
>>reasonably competent Terran medical administration, amongst the arrivals is
>>nonexistent. And, if they *do* have a diseases, they also have the
>>antibodies in their bloodstream that will enable a vaccine to be made from
>>it -- if you allow the semi-miraculous claims for Terran Biowar tech. Even
>>the Vilani would be able to handle making vaccines because, as should be
>>obvious, they would have had to have previously -- in the meantime,
>>quarantine provisions would limit the spread until sufficient doses of
>>vaccine were available. That's assuming that you accept the Gateway virus as
>>being "canon".
>
>The Plague of Duskir did not start until the RoM when "Millions of people of
>Terran ancestry moved to the former Vilani Empire". There is your disease
>pool. As to the devistating nature of it. These are human specific diseases.
>The Terrans have 300,000 years worth of immunity and the Vilani
>immunioresponse system has been weakened by 300,000 years of lack of use.

And moving such large numbers of people means you are also moving the medical
knowledge and technology to prevent the diseases ever being a problem. The
Terrans are the source of serums, and their knowlege tells them this -- few if
any Vilani would have died *unless* you are claiming that the Terrans had an
official policy of allowing or encouraging such a die back? This could hardly
have been to their advantage -- and. after all, wasn't the reason for
Estigaribbia's coup *supposedly* because he and the terran navy were concerned
that the Vilani weren't going to be treated fairly? And this was *before* any
"millions" moved into the ZS.

>These diseases will spread like wildfire (they are evolved to spread amongst
>resistant Terrans) and the Vilani will die in droves. Assuming the Terrans
>intervene (very likely) with vaccinations and antibiotics the shear scale of
>the disaster is overwhelming. Terran vaccines are of limited use since they

Er, well, no. Terran vaccines are *not* all attenuated live viruses. They can be
killed viruses, which are not dangerous -- and we can reasonably assume that by
the period in question medical advances have made even greater advances than we
have today, and that there will be better ways of doing things than we do now.

>are mostly attenuated live strains and the Vilani have a high rate of
>negative reactions. Remember the Vilani immunioresponse system has been

Where is it stated in "canon" that the Vilani have a high rate of negative
reactions? If you claim *I* am guessing, then surely this is no better than a
guess on your part? And is their any medical/physiological reason for believing
it?

>greatly weakened by 300,000 years without being used; this is one of the most
>vital parts of the whole thing. After this long without being used, the
>Vilani's immune system is very much weakened.

That's your argument. But what about the minor races (which are minor only in
terms of not having Starflight, not in numbers) and the Droyne, and the Vargr,
and the Zhos? They have a different disease experience -- and it is implied in
a number of sources that *racial* Vilani were never a majority of the populace
even under the Ziru Sirka at its height! Which knocks your theory =
somewhat on
its ear.

>>No, the *Vilani* on *pre-spaceflight* Vland would have had no reason to.
>>However, the first time they caught a disease on a less hostile -- or, as
>>you say, more compatible, world they would have paid attention to the locals
>>and *they* would have had some idea (as did pre-modern terrans) of the ways
>>to treat such diseases. Since the only way for the *locals* to deal with
>>such diseases as were endemic/epidemic *locally* would be to use technology
>>(or quarantine, probably both) there would be many planets around the empire
>>where the medical knowledge would exist. Then, given computer tech and the
>>widespread spread of knowledge, there would be no excuse for what passed for
>>the Vilani medical community to become aware of these diseases, how they
>>were spread, and how to control them ... after all, the Ziru Sirka was a
>>trading empire, and this means there must inevitably have been trading in
>>diseases (by accident, as biological cargoes were traded) ... and since you
>>are claiming the Vilani would have had no medical knowledge (at least to
>>begin with) they would often have sector wide outbreaks of unknown diseases
>>that would be traced down to a single planet of origin and probably
>>shipments of foods or other exotic biologicals.
>
>You are failing to recognise just how staggeringly complex the human
>immunoresponse system is. Sure, early in their history of spaceflight they
>probably did have a few very nasty plagues, but unless they encountered a
>technologically advanced culture which had an understanding of the *human*
>immunioresponse system; or such plague outbreaks become endemic throughout

Technologically advanced? Germ Theory of disease, TL3-4. Vaccination, TL2-3.
Sorry, that's not all that advanced. Or are you simply assuming that the Vilani
are stupid? And ignore the experience of diseases (that can cross over to them)
of the minor human races, the Vargr, the Droyne and the Zhos?

>a large portion of Vilani space, they would not have that understanding.
>Terran understanding only came about because these diseases were a day to
>day threat for the overwhelming majority of humans. An alien race will not
>do, they will not have the same immunioresponse system. The Vilani probably
>did have cures for a number of diseases, but it's unlikely they knew just
>how they worked.

And there will be Droyne, minor humans, Vargr etc to whom these diseases *will*
be a day to day threat -- and the Vilani will inevitably be affected by them as
well. They will therefore become aware of ways -- even if its only quarantine,
initially, to deal with them. They cannot avoid it -- and since it is quite low
tech to develop some understanding of how these diseases work (statistics played
a part on Terra -- and the Vilani aren't stupid) and spread they would
inevitably have some defences.

>>Then, of course, we know that at least one world was used by the Ancients as
>>a biological preserve and had Whales and other Terran organisms there ....
>>and since animals are a classic disease pool for humans, that world at least
>>would have been the source of much scientific development. And we can
>>reasonably assume that there would have been other worlds where fewer Terran
>>animal species would have been settled, and on some they would have
>>survived, providing disease pools for crossover.
>
>Again only very very limited pools. Plus Urunishu was inhabited by a
>primative human race. So they would have nothing to contribute and just
>finding biologically related species would not aid the Vilani's poor state
>of biomedical technology either.

But the humans there would have suffered from all sorts of diseases -- and any
Vilani who visited there would also have been vulnerable; terribly vulnerable,
if your theories are correct. This would mean that the diseases would inevitably
travel offplanet -- especially if, as you claim, they didn't even have a reason
to undestand quarantine. This would have been disastrous. Then, there's the
Droyne, whose diseases can and have affected humans; the Vargr; and other
"minor" humans.

>>Anyway, *if* the Vilani were so vulnerable -- how do you explain the fact
>>that the Vargr (geneered Terran canines) and Zhodani (humans as well) were
>>completely unaffected in "canon" by anything like the Plague of Duskir or
>>Terran Biowar efforts? The answer -- the same reason that "canon" re Biowar
>>and the Plague of Duskir should be seen as Vilani excuses for being beaten
>>fair and square by superior Terran technology and tactics ... it's the old
>>"stab in the back" theory. Don't blame your *own* shortcomings, blame
>>"perfidious Terra!"
>
>Well, the Zhodani were! Plus neither the Zhodani or Vargr had 300,000 years
>of degeneration of their immunioresponse systems.

a) but how do you *explain* it.
b) if the Vilani were 300k years into degenerate immunoresponse, surely the Zhos
and Vargr are either 1) a source of huge danger for the Vilani, as they are
hotbeds of diseases that the Vilani can't handle, or 2) are just as vulnerable.

>>Botulism *toxin* is, of course, *not a disease* ... it is a *poison* that is
>>the waste product of a disease. The disease itself is not lethal, the waste
>>product/poison is. And the "biowar" agent they made was the *toxin* and
>>*not* the disease itself. It really should be classified with "chemical"
>>weapons (poison gases and the like) for that reason.
>
>Botulinal toxin (like all the other biotoxin such as sateriotoxin, enderotoxin,
>etc) are classified as biological agents. Most bacterial diseases damage via
>toxins. Both Anthrax and Plague (in all their forms) kill via toxins.

And is there any reason why tjhe Vilani couldn't understand biotoxins? NO! They
had to deal with them every time the Shulgilii prepared a meal -- they had to
prepare foods that were poisonous without the proper preparation! So it is only
a short step from that to handling biotoxins produced by spores or bacteria. And
even if the Vilani never encountered a disease that was specific to them on
other planets, are you saying that there would *not* have been biotoxins that
they would have encountered. Even if it was a case of a bacteria analog or virus
analog doing a kamikaze and killing itself in an alien organism (a Vilani), if
its death produces a toxin, the effects are just the same as for Botulism and
Anthrax.

>>>experimented with are (they managed to find a strain of Rabbit Fever
>>>[Francisella tularensis] with a mortality rate of 60%). Also antrax was
>>>found to be very infectous, just you needed exposure to a high number of
>>>bacteria (around 20,000 spores), but thats only twice the exposure required
>>>for
>
>>A mortality rate of 60% is not 100%. And such diseases can be limited in
>>spread by the same simple measures that limited (eventually) the spread of
>>Spanish 'Flu (gauze masks, limiting public gatherings etc.)
>
>Given that Rabbit Fever normally has a mortality of less than 1%, 60% is
>damn frightening (remember this is from unclassified material) and =
Rabbit
>Fever can be caught simply by handling infected material. Like Anthrax =
it
>is capable of percutanious infection and is capable of aerosol =
disemination.

So, you don't handle infected material. Most diseases do not last long outside
of a live host. And burning or disinfecting suspect material does the job for
the rest. Hardly high tech solutions.

>>>Pnuemonic Plague. Oh and by the way, pulmonary anthrax is close to 100%
>>>fatal. As to the virus in Gateway, consider Pnuemonic Plague, Incubation
>>>period 3-4 days, followed by a fever lasting 3-4 days. If untreated
>>>mortality is 90-100%; yes diseases can be that virulent and that fast.
>
>>Yes, pulmonary Anthrax *is* 100% lethal -- its also damn rare and pretty
>>damn hard to actually *contract*.
>
>No it's not. Its only less common than cutanious anthrax because most people
>catch Anthrax from handling infected material rather than inhaling the spores
>(thats the only difference between the two forms). Most biowar research
>concentrated on aerosol dissemination of Anthrax which will cause puliminary
>Anthrax.

And since the spores are not normally airborne (they are, as I understand it,
soil borne), this means the most common form of infection is still, as I said,
by contact.

>[snip]
>
>>And its here that we will have to agree to disagree, I suppose.
>
>I guess so.

Definitely!

Phil
- ---------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU)
Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)
Designer, Standard Role Playing (PGD)

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1770
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Monday, September 1 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1771



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

RE: Gateway & Viruses
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1764
Tech level 16
Re: Ship Missions
Re: Tech level 16
Near-C missiles?
Re: Plague of Duskir
Spawn of Eskaloyt
Keanou
Sea Bears
Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 03:08:34 -0700
From: Eric Nolan <ericno@MICROSOFT.com>
Subject: RE: Gateway & Viruses

>*yet* it can be effectively researched and "cured" by the players with their
>advanced tech in a few days. Umm, does anyone else find this to be inexcusable

When we played through this scenario we basically tracked down some
researchers who were desperately working on a cure.  

We asked these highly trained and appropriately experienced people if
they could use computers and analysers that were orders of magnitude
more powerful than anything they had got.

They seemed quite happy.

In short we operated our high tech toys and the guys who really
understood how the virus worked told us what to do.  This seemed a
realistic and plausible solution to us.

Eric.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 01 Sep 1997 04:05:58 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1764

At 01:14 PM 8/31/97 PST, you wrote:
>In mail you write:

>>   Trauma plates are meant to stop handgun rounds. *I* wouldn't like to
>> rely on them to stop a .303 deer round - even if it _is_ a hollowpoint!
>>
>>   Most rifle rounds go right through sheet steel of significant
>> thicknesses.
>
>I know. But I was thinking of *military* type body armor. They use some
>sort of ceramic laminate in the trauma plates. After all, they *do*
>have to worry about not only rifle bullets, but shrapnel.

Shrapnel is stopped by the most bsic armor, it really isn't what the trauma
plate is for.  The trauma plate inserts for an Army issue PASGT vest will
stop a 7.62mmS round fired from 100m, but adds weight and decreses
flexibility.

The whole issue of armoring infantry needs to be looked at from the
perspective of what kills the infantry.  It's not rifle fire, but shrapnel
from artillery and mortars, so most paersonal armor is designed just to
stop those low-velocity, aerodynamicly unsound little murderers.
- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 14:15:52 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Tech level 16

Peter Newman writes:
>Hans Rancke-Madsen wrote
>>So? We have little idea just when the TL 16 planets in 1120 became TL 16.
> 
>The DGP Data was called the Second Survey Data.  Canonically the Second
>Survey was finished by about 1067, therefore these worlds must have
>become TL 16 before 1067 for them to have showed up as TL 16 in the
>Second Survey data.

Regardless of what the DGP data was called (where was that, btw? Can you 
give me a reference?), they cannot be Second Survey data only, because they 
include changes to UPPs made between 1105 and 1110 (Example: Reginas TL). 
Also, it makes very little sense that UPPs of important planets wouldn't be 
updated on a regular basis. The UPPs of some backwater planets may not have 
been updated since 1067, but high-population TL 16 planets surely wouldn't 
be among those. 
  
>>Presumably they are mostly borderline cases. If they are not yet geared to
>>produce TL 16 goods for export, then they can be TL 16 while the Imperium
>>is still TL 15. I don't recall any references to TL 16 ships in Imperial
>>employ in the MT sources. The nearest we come to it are some ships refitted
>>with experimental TL 16 weapons.
> 
>Conspiratorial Traveller will tell you that the fact that they do not
>show up does not mean they did not exist. It could be sort of a "The TL
>16 ships are out there, Scully." situation :)

Logical Traveller will tell you that if you can't detect them, they may as
well not exist. It will also tell you that if they exist, they can be 
detected ;-)

Seriously, while some small TL 16 ships could presumably be built in
secret (in my Traveller universe TL 16 ships are capable of jump-7, and
some secret courier ships do exist), the number of people involved in 
building even a small squadron of battlecruisers would preclude keeping 
them a secret.

Anyway, my point was that of several dozen military ships mentioned in
various Traveller publications, none were built at TL 16. Assuming that
these ships were a representative sample of the Imperial Navy (a not 
unreasonable assumption, I think), TL 16 ships constitutes a very small
part, if any, of the Imperial Navy. So it is possible for the Imperium
to be TL 15 even though some of its planets are TL 16. But the reverse
is not true. If a significant, or even just a sizable, part of the
Imperial ships were TL 16, then the Imperium would be TL 16. How big
a part? I don't know. We know that the Imperium is considered TL 15 even
though some of its ships are TL 14 and even lower, but we don't know how
big a part. 
 
>Regency Sourcebook also points out that (in TNE) TL 16 ships have little
>advantage over TL 15 ships, this is a further incentive not to produce
>them.

But we know from the fact that non-interdicted worlds across the Imperium
have TLs less than 15 that TLs do not measure knowledge, but production.
If you don't produce TL 16 goods, then you are not TL 16. And if the
Imperium don't use TL 16 ships, then the Imperium's space technology is
not TL 16.
 
>>But if Terra had been TL 15 for any length of time, then there would not be
>>just a few TL15 ground troops on Terra. ALL of Terras ground troops would
>>be TL 15. And so would all its other system defense forces.  
> 
>Well actually they could have had a High Common TL of 15 but had a Heavy
>Military TL of 14.  Then a Tl 15 planet would be producing TL 14
>troops.  I am not saying they were TL 15 but (using World Builders
>Handbook) a world can quite easily have military forces at a TL
>different from their High Common Tech Level, Terra could have been one
>of these planets.

True enough. Of course, the whole point of (this part of) Leroy's argument
was that the Solomani couldn't have resisted the powerful TL 15 Imperium if 
Terra hadn't had equivalent military forces, ergo Terra had to be TL 15 too.



      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 13:56:14 +0100
From: "Nick Munn" <N.S.Munn@sheffield.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Ship Missions

Marc writes:

> I am trying to fill out a table for ship design detailing various
> ship missions.
>
> Column 1 is the basic mission. Column 2 is a mission modifier.
>
> Does anyone care to make some suggestions?

Who, us reticent types on TML? 8-)

My first suggestion would be to give these mission types meaning in 
practical terms.  For instance, military vessels would often have 
traffic priority,  and type GK rescue boats would certainly have 
docking priorities at starports.  Little things to add some 
roleplaying ideas, really, noted in the same section.

My codes for "Basic mission" are a division into mission _types_, and 
I have chosen to retain the older meaning of "cruiser" and hence 
include "intruders" and "raiders" in the category of cruisers.  
Suffices qualify the mission type or description where necessary.
As far as possible these mission descriptors do not imply anything 
about ship size.


SHIP MISSIONS
Code	Basic	     Suffix
A	Auxiliary    Armo(u)red 
B	Battle       Boat
C	Cruiser      Civilian
D	Defence      Destroyer 
E	Escort       Tender
F	Fighter	     Fusion-drive
G	Rescue	     Fast
H	Hauler       Heavy
I	Lander       Ion-drive
J	Shuttle	     Jump
K	Carrier	     Craft
L	Liner	     Light
M	Merchant     Military
N	Freighter    Tanker
O	Orbiter      Tender
P	Patrol	     Planetoid
Q	Decoy	
R	Research     Rocket
S	Scout	     System
T	Transport    Troop
U	Unknown	     Unknown
V	Module	     Vehicle
W	Station	     Warship
X	Courier	     Experimental
Y	Yacht        Hospital
Z	Classified   Classified

Notes on mission codes:

Orbiters and Landers are typically lower tech craft designed for 
surface-to-orbit and orbit-to-surface tasks respectively.

Boats are generally larger vessels than Craft; both are insystem 
craft only, with no jump capability.

Fusion- and Ion-drive ships and Rocket-propelled craft have their 
maneuvering ability restricted in some way compared to HEPlaR or 
thruster-propelled ships.


Example mission codes:

PW, a patrol warship, could be an antipiracy vessel or a 
heavily-gunned reconnaisance craft.

Defence boats (DB) may be quite low endurance craft, whereas system 
defence craft (DS) are usually capable of system-wide travel.  Both 
are non-starships.

Military ships include mercenary "cruisers" (type TM) as well as 
standard cargo lifters for army supplies (also type CM) and landing 
craft (IM).  Troop landing craft are designated IT.

Auxiliary craft are either carried as lifeboats etc. (type AK 
represents most small craft) or perform auxiliary functions to Naval 
fleets like the type AN tanker and type AO tender.



Nick

Dr. Nick Munn, Dept. of Information Studies, University of Sheffield
Tel. (0)114 222 2673, email n.s.munn@sheffield.ac.uk

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 15:40:32 +0100
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: Re: Tech level 16

>Seriously, while some small TL 16 ships could presumably be built in
>secret (in my Traveller universe TL 16 ships are capable of jump-7, and
>some secret courier ships do exist), the number of people involved in
>building even a small squadron of battlecruisers would preclude keeping
>them a secret.

That big deltawinged skunkworks plane supposedly existing today has been
kept pretty much a secret (no, not the batwing bomber - a newer pulse jet,
lifting body thing) but the fact that I know about it more or less
contradicts my position.

Anyways if the above is true a project involving LOTS of people seems to
have been kept a secret in the real world and in Tav due to limitations on
fast long range comm secrets might be easier to keep.


/Anders Backman
Aniware AB
anders.backman@aniware.se

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 08:37:21 -0500
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: Near-C missiles?

Sinbad Sam wrote:

>
>At 01:10 PM 8/31/97 PST, Leonard Erickson wrote:
>>In mail you write:
>>
>>>         Thruster Plate Missiles are near C impact shocks if thrown from
>>>         long distances. IIRC someone mentionened 2000AU as a effective
>range
>>>         of TPlates. They would not even need a warhead. Thruster plates
>>>         are evil hand waving, so we should reduce TPlates to 666 diameter
>>>         as short range and effectivity downfall like lasers and other
>>>         equipment.
>>
>>The "nice" thing about near c missiles is that they can't manuever
>>worth shit. So anything that gets any warning can dodge them. They are
>>only useful against immobile targets (at least until we get drives that
>>can do multiple thousands of gees).
>
>Hmm following this anology would mean current day fighters can never get
>hit by current missiles because the fighter can all ways get out of the
>way. NOT!


	Current missiles use aerodynamic control surfaces to steer.  Near-C
T-plate missiles operating in vacuum cannot.

Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 16:13:37 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Plague of Duskir

Phillip and Andrew, could you please keep your sentenses a bit shorter?
It enhances readability immensely.

Phillip McGregor writes:
>>From: Andrew Moffatt-Vallance <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
>>>From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
>>Well firstly, while the idea of widespread Terran use of biowar agents
>>was toyed with, most people here dropped that idea fairly quickly as 
>>being unrealistic mainly due to the fact that the Vilani could retaliate 
>>with nuclear and chemical weapons. Also I have not "revised" canon in any 
>>way. Canon is that the Vilani evolved amongst an incompatible ecosystem.
>
>Errm, this is news to me! I raised this issue some considerable time ago
>and was howled down by the canon-heads (not necessarily you) 

Phillip, is 'canon-head' meant to be derogatory? It sounds a bit that way.

>who claimed that Biowar and/or the Plague of Duskir was *the* reason for 
>Terran victory (or pretty close to that, anyway) -- we're talking last 
>year, here.

I don't have _Rats&Cats_ with me, so I may be wrong, but I believe that 
the Plague of Duskir was the reason why the Terrans managed to establish 
themselves strongly on a number of formerly Vilani planets _after_ the 
wars were over. (My own theory, which also goes some way to explain the 
victory itself, is that most Siru Zirka planets were medium-population 
and deliberately kept that way. Thus the odds against the Terrans, while 
still high, were not actually so crippling as they would have been if the 
Siru Sirka had had as many high-population worlds as the Imperium has. 
Likewise, a 100,000 Terrans immigrants would have a lot more impact on 
a medium-population Vilani planet than on a high-population one; 
something that a good plague or two would  also help along.)  

>>The question here is, just how many pathogens did the Vilani encounter?
>>one per world, one per ten worlds, one per hundred worlds, one per
>>thousand worlds? Unless such encounters occured with exceptional frequency, 
>>and unless the vast majority of such encounters had a high mortality rate
>>and unless a significant number of these became established Empire wide 
>>then the Vilani probably will not develop significant improvements to their 
>>biomedical technology.
> 
>The way the situation is referred to in Gateway implies that it is a 
>reasonably frequent occurrence. 

Can't argue there as I don't have _Gateway_.

>And the Droyne were (as per Zho sourcebook) possessed of enough similarity 
>that Biowar agents aimed at them were *extremely* lethal to them -- 

One biowar agent proved extremely lethal to them. There could be any number 
of explantations for that.

>and they were encountered regularly by the Vilani (and are on one of the
>planets in Gateway -- and were there under the Ziru Sirka) -- so we can
>assume that Droyne diseases would have had similar crossover to Vilani.

I disagree. We cannot assume from one artificial biowar agent to a lot of
naturally occuring diseases. It does not follow.

>Then there's all those other "minor" human races -- we can assume that
>some at least had bugs that were benign to them but not too friendly to 
>the Vilani; 

Very true. But none of these would affect all, or even a sizable 
fraction of Vilani. Each would affect a tiny group of Vilani. One can 
assume that the Vilani space-oriented culture developed effective 
quarantine measures fairly quickly. Which would prevent the rest of the 
Vilani from encountering those diseases.

>and on some of the worlds (there was one that had many Terran species, a 
>Ancient Zoo, in effect) there would be other Terran organisms ... and since
>animals are the source of many human pathogens originally, the Vilani would 
>have  encountered them before. 

All very true. But you cannot jump to the conclusion that the solution 
they came up with was to develop a deep understanding of biology or even 
the germ theory of disease. Another solution would be rigorous quarantine 
measures. And those would be absolutely no use against a horde of Terran 
immigrants.

>Then there's the Zho -- and the Vargr ... who, after all, are Terran stock 
>and would have bugs that would be possibly nasty to the Vilani.

The Zhos are no problem, of course, since contact with them was minimal and
would be governed by age-old quarantine protocols. But the Vargr would be
more of a problem, especially on those worlds that they shared. But again,
the Vilani who survived sharing a world with Vargr could be those who
survived by natural selection, and they would stay on that world and not
pass on their immumity to the Vilani living in the other end of the Siru
Zirka. 

>>They must inevitably have had many such encounters, as I suggested. 
>>Since the diseases they encounter would be endemic (and occasionally
>>epidemic) on worlds that they wish to rule, and since even quarantine
>>is not really viable against a world that you have some wish to rule, 
>>then they would have no option but to develop methods for dealing with 
>>said diseases.

You're right. But said methods does not _have_ to include vaccination.
Doctors today deal with infectious patients for their whole life and don't
catch anything from them. Something like the measures used by the Spacers
described by Asimov in "The Caves of Steel" (minimum contact, sterile
procedures, etc.). Hmm... interesting idea. No wonder the Vilani were not
very popular with their subject races ;-). Using non-humans intermediators
would also help. Perhaps that's why the Bwaps were so popular as mid-level
functionaries.

>>Why not just quarantine? after all there's plenty of worlds out there.
>>If there is intelligent life on the world, then they would likely be
>>primative
> 
>Indeed, why have an Interstellar Empire at all and effectively quarantine
>*yourself*. Sort of counterproductive, though.

There's all the empty planets colonized by Vilani to rule. Plus, as I said,
ruling by proxy.
 
>>(the Vilani encountered very few technologically advanced races), so 
>>their level of biomedical theory is probably no better than the Vilani. 
>
>But they will need to develop more sophisticated technologies and, unlike
>the Vilani on Vland itself, *they* will have good reason to do so. 

But their measures would be less useful for the Vilani. You're forgetting 
Andrew's second suggestion about the effect of evolving on Vland: that the 
Vilani immune system was affected negatively by 290,000 years of isolation 
in an almost disease-free environment. The other minor races could have had 
their own disease vectors. Propably less than the Terrans  --  one might 
compare them to the meso-americans  --  but enough to keep their immune 
system at least partly on its toes.

>There is no way that you can have an empire like the Ziru Sirka and not
>have some sort of policy for such situations, even if they happen 
>*relatively* rarely.

But the situation had NEVER happened before. Never before had many thousand
disease carriers been introduced to populated Vilani planets. At most some
Vilani diplomats had been infected while living on another planet.

>And, as they advance in technical sophistication, they will develop
>better understanding ... after all, the Germ theory of disease is a TL3 
>or 4 development, and vaccination is even earlier.

But what if vaccination proves not to work on the Vilani? Remember,
Andrew is postulating an impaired Vilani immume system.

>>>Yes, but you can also take the "slash and burn" approach to disease
>>>prevention --- one that requires very little technology and which will
>>>stop a human vectored disease in its tracks ... do what they did in 
>>>Medieval Europe with the Plague; mark a cross on the door and forbid 
>>>anyone to leave until all are dead or all are well. Use convicts to 
>>>collect bodies of the dead at specified times (or use robots) and 
>>>incinerate them.
>> 
>>Such methods would appear *very* extreme and inhumane to the Vilani,
>>plus given the Vilani's communial living arrangements, "painting a cross 
>>on the door" means sealing in hundreds.

No, I agree with Phillip that such measures would be used. Indeed, they are
a natural outgrowth of the quarantine protocol that I postulate had been
developed by the Vilani to deal with diseases. What I don't agree is how
effective such measures would be as long as tens of thousands of disease
carriers live on the same planets.
 
>There is nothing in my understanding of Vilani society that precludes 
>them coming to a realisation that, sometimes, the few simply have to be
>sacrificed for the safety of the many.

Nothing except the fact that the few are giving the orders (The Terran
immigrants are the real problem. Only total segregation from them is
going to do much good, and that's difficult if they insist on doing 
business with you.

>Since animals were the origin and pretty much only a problem when 
>domesticated (you need a certain population density for the crossover 
>to occur in most cases), which implies a certain level of civilisation, 
>then any contact with any civilisation above TL0-1 would expose the Vilani 
>to the possibility of such effects. And the local populace are almost 
>certainly already affected. This means that the disease regime of the 
>Vilani would have been widespread -- though probably not as widespread as 
>that of Terra.

What if we assume that due to an impaired immune system, most diseases are
as lethal to Vilani? If that was the case, vaccination would not develop
as a measure. The only possible measure, actually, would be quarantine and
destruction of the host. OTOH, diseases would very rarely achieve epidemic
proportions, because they would kill the infected people before they could
pass it on.
 
>>The Plague of Duskir did not start until the RoM when "Millions of 
>>people of Terran ancestry moved to the former Vilani Empire". There is 
>>your disease pool. As to the devastating nature of it. These are human 
>>specific diseases. The Terrans have 300,000 years worth of immunity and 
>>the Vilani immunioresponse system has been weakened by 300,000 years of 
>>lack of use.
> 
>And moving such large numbers of people means you are also moving the
>medical knowledge and technology to prevent the diseases ever being a 
>problem. The Terrans are the source of serums, and their knowlege tells 
>them this -- few if any Vilani would have died *unless* you are claiming 
>that the Terrans had an official policy of allowing or encouraging such a 
>die back? 

You are assuming that the standard Terran measures would work on the Vilani.
Am I wrong or are most vaccines actually weakened diseases? You are still
ignoring Andrew's very cogent point that the Vilani were less able to deal
with diseases than the Terrans.

>This could hardly have been to their advantage -- and. after all, wasn't 
>the reason for Estigaribbia's coup *supposedly* because he and the terran 
>navy were concerned that the Vilani weren't going to be treated fairly? 
>And this was *before* any "millions" moved into the ZS.

Actually, what Estigaribbia & Co. wanted may not have had much resemblance
to what a load of Terran immigrants wanted. Given human history I would not
consider it unlikely that on some planets the Terrans _did_ deliberately
refrain from helping the Vilani. I do consider it unlikely that it happened
on very many of them.

>Er, well, no. Terran vaccines are *not* all attenuated live viruses. They
>can be killed viruses, which are not dangerous -- and we can reasonably 
>assume that by the period in question medical advances have made even 
>greater advances than we have today, and that there will be better ways of 
>doing things than we do now.

True, but we cannot assume that they can cure everything, nor that they
would know everything there is to know about the Vilani. There may be a
special weakness of the Vilani that does make even dead virus dangerous.

>>are mostly attenuated live strains and the Vilani have a high rate of
>>negative reactions. Remember the Vilani immunioresponse system has been
> 
>Where is it stated in "canon" that the Vilani have a high rate of negative
>reactions? 

Nowhere, as far as I know. It is a good stab at explaining a bit of canon,
though.

>If you claim *I* am guessing, then surely this is no better than a guess 
>on your part? And is there any medical/physiological reason for believing 
>it?

No, but previously published material indicates that the Vilani was
especially vulnerable to disease and that the Terran medical knowledge,
andvanced though it was, was unable to cope with it.

Hmmm... you know, I see the glimmering of an idea here. You know how some
poisons and diseases kill, not by themselves, but by destroying immune
system leaving the patient vulnerable to all sorts of secondary diseases?
So that the actual cause of death will vary widely from patient to patient?
What if the Plague of Duskir was something like that? Something that
specifically the Terrans were carrying, and something that specifically
Vilani were vulnerable to? That way the Vilani could have had their limited,
but usually adequate, knowledge of diseases and still be vulnerable. In
fact, since Phillip is right that logically the Terrans would have helped
if they could, obviously the Terrans _couldn't_ help, so the Vilani lack
of biological skill, while real enough, is actually fairly irrelevant. The
Terran medical skill was also unable to cope.

>>greatly weakened by 300,000 years without being used; this is one of the
>>most vital parts of the whole thing. After this long without being used, 
>>the Vilani's immune system is very much weakened.

Or maybe just lacking one vital bit. A bit that wasn't important until they
encountered the Terrans. That would account for all Phillip's problems
with the present explanation. Even if the Vilani did have a reasonable
way of dealing with some diseases and quarantine measures to deal with
others, the Plague of Duskir would still work if it was a single, specific
agent found only in Terrans and deadly only to Vilani. And if it had a long
incubation period, perhaps decades, the effect could be really devastating.
It might be something that had adapted to standard Terrans immunisation
techniques, perhaps by developing some sort of "opaqueness" to standard
detection measures. Being harmless to Terrans no one knew about it, and
when it manifested itself in the Vilani, the standard Terran measures
were inadequate to deal with it.


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 16:42:40 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Spawn of Eskaloyt

Catchy title, huh?

I have been working of the animals found on the planet Vanejen in Spinward
Marches. The planet is known to have a population of Chirpers (Droyne who
have lost the ability to assign castes) and it occurred to me that when
the Ancients spread the Droyne across the galaxy, they propably took some
of the flora and fauna of Eskaloyt with them. So even though Eskaloyt itself 
is lost, a 'Bestiary' style article about its plants and animals would be very 
useful, since these must be established on scores or even hundreds of worlds. 
The idea is hereby made available to anyone who cares.

In the meantime, I still need some animals for Vanejen, and as I am not 
very into developing plants and animals, I was hoping that someone with 
an interest in such matters would like to help out.

I did invent some names for some animals from Eskaloyt years ago when I was
working out how the Ancient, Old, and New Coyn sets looked like. I made up
a group of six coyns found in the Ancient version that had subsequently
been dropped (I believe that the Ancient coyn sets were used for divination
and made up six prey animals). Thos were: the hissayt, a small winged
fructivore, the emissyob, a medium-sized animal with long antennae, the
ayvaylk, a large animal with massive legs and trunk-like antennae, the
bestoy, a smallish aboreal leaf-eater, the nebbay, a largish herd animal,
and the snake-like hayyarm. (There was also a six-limbed carnivore used on
the coyn called 'Beast', but I didn't work out a name for it.)

Anyway, I particularily need a pack and riding animal, perhaps the nebbay.
Can anybody help me out with a description and some plausible details?


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 17:06:52 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Keanou

The planet Keanou (Spinward Marches 2411) is a problem to me. In _Spinward
Marches_, _Twilight's Peak_, and _The Traveller Adventure_ its hydrographics
score is 0, indicating that around 1105 it had a maximum of 4% free-standing
water. But in _Spinward Marches Campaign_ and the _Regency Sourcebook_ it
has a hydrographics score of 2, indicating that in 1110 (and 1202) it had a
minimum of 15% free-standing water.

Can anybody suggests how a planet can go from 4 to 15% open water in 5 years
or less?


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8
  

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 17:02:25 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Sea Bears

I'm working, on and off, on the history of the Spinward Marches. In JTAS#3
there is a 'Bestiary' article by Loren Wiseman about the Sea Bear, an 
amphibious carnivore about the size of a dog native to Thengo in Chronor 
Subsector which had "been used in pre-imperial colonization projects in the 
Jewell, Lianic, and Massina subsectors" (All subsectors adjacent to Chronor).

NON-CANON ALERT: The following discuss the way things are in my campaign,
not how things are in the canonical Traveller universe. Since I try to
keep mine compatible with the official one you're invited to point out
incompatibilities, but don't blow a gasket over it, OK?

I decided that the only two possibilities (that we know of) for having
performed these colonization projects were the Ancients and the Zhodani,
and since I think the Ancients are being a tad overused as it is, I
settled for the Zhodani. The way I see the story, the Zhodani decided to
begin preparing the Chronor, Jewell, Lianic, and Massina subsectors for
colonization around -1100. Their approach was a long term plan. They
explored the good planets in the area and then seeded them with useful
animals. The plan was to let things develop for a few hundred years
before actually beginning colonization. Then around -1000 the Zhos had
a fundamental policy change and decided to remain inside their borders
for a while. The various colonization projects were abandoned and the
Sea Bears and other animals left to fend for themselves. On some worlds
they managed to establish themselves, on others they died out.

Now, the problem I need help with is this: Why did the Zhodani decide to
spread the Sea Bears to all these worlds? I've already decided that they
must be domesticatable and that they could propably be as useful as dog
on land and (non-sapient) dolphins in the water, but is that enough to
explain it? Or could there be some other reason? I've thought about
giving one of their organs anagathic properties, but that is something
that I also think has been overused. Does any of you have any ideas?


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8
 

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 01 Sep 1997 08:51:42 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)

At 12:43 AM 9/1/97 GMT, you wrote:
>On Sun, 31 Aug 1997 10:30:47 -0700, Douglas E. Berry wrote:

>> Now let's have Wayne move down a corridor that has a T-branch in the
>> middle.  Wayne wishes to move 10m, and the intersection is 5m down.  After
>> moving 5m (spending 5AP), he reaches the intesection to find Joe average
>> (14AP) hiding in the branch.  At that point, both players could declare
>> their attempt to perform an action.
>
>Must Wayne declare that he is spending all 10 APs on moving down the
>corridor, or state something like "I gonna move to here, look around,
>and then decide whether or not to continue"?  If it is the former, is
>he then locked in to continue moving down the corridor past the
>intersection or may he confront Joe by shooting him or engaging in
>melee (regardless of whether or not he wins the initiative test?

If he declared he was going down to the intersection as a single action,
then he would have spent 5AP and finsihed that action.  Then he could have
declared "I'm peeking around the corner" or "I'm continuing down the hall."

Somebody pointed out that Joe should have gotten the drop on Wayne because
Wayne was sltriding by.. my bad.  

>***need new AP action cost for "ready weapon"***

If you mean drawing from a scabbard or holster, yes.  But any weapon held
is considered ready. that's what the Intiative test is about, and part of
the reason why Tactics is part of the AP total.  The more you know about
combat, the better you'll be at keeping a weapon readied by always tracking
with the muzzle, or knowing how to hold the sword in a ready stance.

>I still believe that all these reactive initiative tests could get out
>of hand:
>
>"A" beats "B" on an initiative test and moves first down a corridor...
>comes across "C" hiding in an alcove... another test is made... "A"
>wins and decides to keep going... comes across mutually hostile "D",
>"E", and "F" at a T-junction... "A" beats "D" and "E" but not "F", who
>proceeds to shoot "A"... "A" then completes his move... now it is
>"B's" turn... runs past "C" and into "D", "E", and "F"... more
>initiative tests are made... "B" barely survives, but not before "A"
>tries to take a shot at him with his remaining APs, another initiative
>test is made... etc, etc.

In can get confusing.  But rember, in each of those cases, once everybody
who can get involved, is involved, *all* the actions happen and are
resolved, before "A" can continue his move.  Also, in that scenario, people
are going to be running short on AP real fast.  If D, E, and F are all
hostile, they'll probably be busy going for cover and shooting each other
when B comes down the hall.  (If he even decides to after hearing the
gunfire.)

Here's how I see it:

A and B roll for initiative.  A wins, declares he'll move
A moves past C.  Intiative task, A wins (idea: spending AP on an inititive
task has the same effect as ending an action.. in this case, if A had spent
AP to react to C, B would be able to make his action before either C or A.)
A continues moving, meets D,E,, & F, wins two of the three inits (good
dice!), F shoots A.

At this point, A has moved several meters, taken part in three Intiative
tasks, and been shot.  Odds are, he's pretty low on AP. (Idea: being
wounded has the same affect as finishing an action.)

A then finishes his move.  B may now take his (long delayed) move. After
his encounter with the three amigos, you have A taking a shot at him.  You
forgot C, who is till skulking in his alcove.  A cannot move until all the
actions from his prior intiative tasks are resolved.  So now A has B, C,
and at least F gunning for him.  I'd run like hell.

After C has moved, and resolved any conflicts, then D (if he has any AP
left at this moment), E, then F.  Then, and only then can A spend any
remaining AP.


>> I'm playtesting rules for using pistols one-handed (+1 difficulty level)
>> and using rests/supports/bipods (-1 difficulty level) whaddya think?
>
>As long as rests/supports/bipods specifically refer to heavier weapons
>that need them.  Most PCs will not enter combat with benches designed
>to hold their handguns steady as if the whole thing was a test firing
>procedure :)

Firing from a supported position, like a tree trunk or sandbags is an
incredible aid to aiming a longarm, and I've seen studies that show that
accuracy from firing pistols one-handed drops by about 75% off two-handed
fire..   Having a gun bench on a known range would make most shotting tasks
quite easy.  I use them to set sights on rifles.

>Since one difficulty level could mean as much as a 3 1/2 point shift
>(based on the average result on a single D6) in the chance of success,
>they should be considered exactly that (ie: +/-3.5 DM).  I'll let you
>playtest it a bit more before I comment further.

Which seems to be about right.. I'll look at tit next Wednsday.
- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1771
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Monday, September 1 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1772



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: CSC Grav skateboard
Re: Universal Range Bands
CSC Earliest tank
CSC Fission powered tank TL-10
Re: CSC Panzer Hovercraft
Re: Task Resolution

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 09:09:26 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: Re: CSC Grav skateboard

Dammit Rod!

You beat me to it!

Not mentioned in this is the safety harness and tether that I'm _sure_
those homiciadal maniacs at Spofulam left out. But the controls are
presumed to work in the same fashion.
Sufficiently Advanced Technologies presents:
grav surfboard (TL12)
Designed by Bruce Johnson

Summary:
     0.01 displacement ton slab streamlined;  108 kg;  Cr 356
Chassis:
     140 L slab streamlined (1.8 m long x 51 cm wide x 16 cm high);
Structure: 22.8 kg of light composite, rated for 1.0Gs, body 0.00 cm
thick, 1 armour rating
     
Performance:
     50.0 kW TL12 Fusion Plus power plant;  Fuel: 31 mL of enriched water
(31.3 g), 2 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 3.00 kW contragrav;  Maximum Speed: 97 km/h;
Range: 193 km;  Agility: -3DM
Crew:
     Crew roster: pilot;  0 crew station
Communications:
     No communicators installed.
Sensors:
     No sensors installed.
Other:
     117 L of cargo space


Designed with CSC (software )Robert Prior, 1997)

And here's the performance version...cobbled together by some truly
twisted individual, Sufficiently Advanced Technologies has issued a stern
warning that it's really, really DUMB to do this!

grav surfboard (TL12) (With Chevy 454 Grav engine attached)
Designed by Bruce Johnson

Summary:
     0.01 displacement ton slab streamlined;  208 kg;  Cr 2023
Chassis:
     140 L slab streamlined (1.8 m long x 51 cm wide x 16 cm high);
Structure: 114 kg of light composite, rated for 5.0Gs, body 0.00 cm thick,
1 armour rating
     
Performance:
     50.0 kW TL12 Fusion Plus power plant;  Fuel: 31 mL of enriched water
(31.3 g), 2 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 39.0 kW contragrav;  Maximum Speed: 4486 km/h;
Range: 8937 km;  Agility: -26DM
Crew:
     Crew roster: pilot;  0 crew station
Communications:
     No communicators installed.
Sensors:
     No sensors installed.
Other:
     1.73 L of cargo space


Designed with CSC (software )Robert Prior, 1997)

 Marty McFly at Mach 3.6!

Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 09:14:44 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: Re: Universal Range Bands

On Sun, 31 Aug 1997, Sam Thomas wrote:

> At 01:10 PM 8/31/97 PST, Leonard Erickson wrote:
> >The "nice" thing about near c missiles is that they can't manuever
> >worth shit. So anything that gets any warning can dodge them. They are
> >only useful against immobile targets (at least until we get drives that
> >can do multiple thousands of gees).
> 
> Hmm following this anology would mean current day fighters can never get
> hit by current missiles because the fighter can all ways get out of the
> way. NOT!

Say what?? A near C missile of the size we're talking about masses
_gazillions_ of tons at that velocity...that's how they do so much damage!
Where does a near-C tugboat analogize to a current ATA missile?

Modern missiles are a) quite maneuverable, and b) nowhere near C

Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs

> 

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 09:19:36 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: CSC Earliest tank

Sort of a monitor on wheels..this _could have been done at Civil War
technologies. This would be hellish to be working in, though!

Civil War (1864 that is!) tank (TL3)


Designed by Bruce Johnson

- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary: 

8.00 displacement ton box; 90.8 tonnes; kCr 264 

Chassis: 

112 kL box (7.5 m long x 3.9 m wide x 3.9 m high); Structure: 2.70 
tonnes of soft steel, rated for 1.0Gs, body 0.50 cm thick
Armour: 5 front (2.5 cm), 5 sides (2.5 cm), 3 rear (0.50 cm), 3 top 
(0.50 cm), 3 bottom (0.50 cm) 

Performance: 

1.50 MW TL3 Early Steam power plant; Fuel: 599 L of wood (299 kg), 2 
hours supply
Propulsion System: 1.50 MW wheels; Maximum Speed: 28 km/h; Range: 57 km; 
Agility: +3DM 

Crew: 

Crew roster: driver, 2 gunners, Stoker; 4 crew stations 

Armament: 

Weapon	Damage	Range	Shots	Reloads	Notes
Cannon, Medium-3	8 (13 exp)	Very Short	1	20	2
gunners
Communications: 

No communicators installed. 

Sensors: 

No sensors installed. 

Other: 

86.4 kL of cargo space


Designed with CSC (software )Robert Prior, 1997)

Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 09:25:28 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: CSC Fission powered tank TL-10

Just so it's clear that Roderick and Rob aren't the only ones having fun:

Yugly tank (TL10)
Probably done more so that some twit in power could prove that he could do
it. It's big, slow, and ugly, but it'll run for years. It's actually a
first step to designing a true Ogre...just gotta dig out my microgame
rules and figure out what it is.

Designed by Bruce Johnson

- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary: 

40.00 displacement ton box streamlined; 1290 tonnes; MCr 10.3 

Chassis: 

560 kL box streamlined (12 m long x 6.6 m wide x 6.6 m high); Structure: 
4.38 tonnes of crystaliron, rated for 1.0Gs, body 0.01 cm thick, sealed 
to 1 atm
Armour: 19 front (10 cm), 19 sides (10 cm), 15 rear (5.0 cm), 19 top (10 
cm), 19 bottom (10 cm) 

Performance: 

20.1 MW TL8 Fission power plant; Fuel: 20.1 L of radioisotopes (402 kg), 
2000 hours supply
Propulsion System: 20.0 MW tracks; Maximum Speed: 36 km/h; Range: 73666 
km; Agility: +3DM 

Crew: 

Crew roster: driver, gunner; 2 crew stations 

Armament: 

Weapon	Damage	Range	Shots	Reloads	Notes
Cannon, Heavy-8	19 (17 exp)	Very Long	1	50	+2DM, 1
gunner
Autocannon, RF Lt-8	9	Long	1000	600	+2DM, coaxial
Machinegun, Heavy-10	9	Long	300	1000	+2DM, remote
Communications: 

Subcontinental Radio (10.00 kW, TL10, SmVcl, MilSpec, DirAnt)
Continental Laser (100 kW, TL10, SmVcl, MilSpec)

Sensors: 

Active Regional Radar (2.00 kW, MilSpec, MultArray) Resolution: 1.0 mm 
per km of range
Active Subregional Lidar (100 W, MilSpec) Resolution: 1.0 mm per km of 
range
Active Subregional Jammer (100 W, MilSpec) Resolution: 5.0 mm per km of 
range

Other: 

76.2 kL of cargo space


Designed with CSC (software )Robert Prior, 1997)

Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 11:47:21 +0000
From: "Bill Hopper" <whopper@pobox.com>
Subject: Re: CSC Panzer Hovercraft

> From:          Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
> Subject:       CSC Panzer Hovercraft
> 	Dunno whether anyone here read _Hardwired_ by Walter Jon Williams.
> If not, here's a TL-9 armoured and armed hovercraft used for cross-country
> smuggling of low-volume high-value cargoes, or just shooting things and
> breaking people, joyriding through parks and shopping malls, making the
> National Guard earn their keep, parking wherever you want to, and generally
> terrorizing your players.  The armour is enough to stop small arms up to
> aircraft autocannon levels, it does 187 kph flat out, and packs a nastyish
> turret-mounted weapons suite.

If you haven't read _Hardwired_, you should.
WKH

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 13:05:14 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

- --PART.BOUNDARY.0.7572.emout09.mail.aol.com.873133361
Content-ID: <0_7572_873133362@emout09.mail.aol.com.3706>
Content-type: text/plain

Attached.


- --PART.BOUNDARY.0.7572.emout09.mail.aol.com.873133361
Content-ID: <0_7572_873133362@emout09.mail.aol.com.3707>
Content-type: text/plain;
	name="TRAV41~1.TXT"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


Tasks
	The activities which characters in Traveller adventures undertake are ca=
lled tasks. The use of tasks allows specific activities to be resolved co=
nsistently based on defined levels of difficulty and through the use of a=
ppropriate skills, characteristics, and other modifiers. Players can anal=
yze tasks and decide on the appropriate character to undertake each, base=
d on who is best suited to the task.
	Many potential tasks can be skipped over because their resolution would =
slow down the situation without providing any additional drama. The game =
referee is responsible for determining which situations actually call for=
 resolution and which can be assumed completed without difficulty or mish=
ap.
	Dice: Tasks, like all die rolls in Traveller, are resolved using six-sid=
ed dice. In some cases, a half-dice is called for. A half-die is a standa=
rd six-sided die which has been color coded to distinguish it from an ord=
inary die.
	The Synergy of Skill and Aptitude. The Traveller task resolution system =
brings together the personal aptitude represented by the individual Chara=
cteristic and the individual Skill level. Where Characteristic represents=
 natural talent, Skill represents achievement. Because a skill may be ass=
ociated with more than one Characteristic, an individual may be more tale=
nted or have more aptitude in some areas of a skill than in others. For e=
xample, Dexterity and Medical work together in surgery or therapy; Educat=
ion and Medical work together in diagnosis. A high Dexterity low Intellig=
ence character might make a good surgeon; a low Dexterity high Education =
character might make a good diagnostician; a high Dexterity high Educatio=
n character might make a good well-rounded Doctor.
=0D

AN OVERVIEW OF TASKS
	A task expresses and action or activity which characters want to underta=
ke. Each task indicates (using a specific format) what is to be attempted=
, what skills and characteristics are required, and any other information=
 necessary for an understanding of the situation.
	A typical task is
=0D
	To accomplish an important activity (duration).
	(characteristic + skill) +/- modifiers > difficulty (nD)
	appropriate comments about the task.
=0D
	Or, if translated into specific terms,
=0D
	To repair a grav vehicle.
	(Dex + Gravitics) + 1 for Tools (required) > Difficult (2.5D)
	Probably takes several hours.
=0D
	Tasks may be provided in the text, or they may be defined by the referee=
=2E
	The Dice Table. The Dice Table provides the details of die rolls for 1D,=
 2D, 2.5D. 3D, 4D, and 5D. In many cases, the referee can generate tasks =
and assign the appropriate difficulty level for the task by consulting th=
e tables.
=0D
ROLLING TASKS
	When a task becomes necessary, the referee tells the group the task, its=
 required skill and characteristic, and the difficulty level. The players=
 in the group discuss among themselves who will attempt the task. The pla=
yer running the character selected identifies the skill and characteristi=
c levels and determines the target number. He or she then personally roll=
s the dice and compares it with the target number. Low rolls are best. If=
 the die roll result is equal to or less than the target number, the task=
 is successful.
	For example, Eneri Dinsha (7797C7 Communications-2) faces the following =
task:
=0D
	To contact a ship's boat crew.
	(Edu + Communications) > Difficult (2.5D)
=0D
	The target number for the task is (11 + 2 =3D ) 13, which Eneri must rol=
l or less on 2.5D. He rolls 9, which means he succeeds in accomplishing t=
he task. =

=0D
UNIVERSAL TASK FORMAT
=0D
Task Phrase:
	To accomplish an important activity (duration).
=0D
Task Statement:
	(characteristic + skill) +/- modifiers > difficulty (nD)
=0D
Task Comments:
	appropriate comments about the task.
=0D
EXPRESSING TASKS
	Tasks can be expressed in a variety of ways, depending on the important =
elements of the specific situation. The basic expression consists of a ta=
sk phrase, a task statement, and any task comments. A typical task should=
 be stated as with these three elements on three succeeding lines.
	The Task Phrase: The Task Phrase states the specific purpose of the task=
=2E It is stated as an infinitive verb phrase (i.e. "To" followed by a ve=
rb and any modifying words). It effectively states what the character wan=
ts to do.
	If a task phrase requires more than one line, it is probably too complex=
 and should be broken into two or more separate tasks.
	The Task Phrase may contain (in parentheses) the time the task generally=
 takes to accomplish. This information is optional, and may often be igno=
red.
	The Task Statement: The Task Statement shows the specific information wh=
ich is required to resolve the task. Task resolution is based on a skill =
and its associated characteristic, applicable modifiers, and a difficulty=
 level.
The sum of the characteristic and skill and all applicable modifiers to t=
he left of the > is the target number. The player must roll equal to or l=
ess than the target number to succeed at the task.
	The Task Comments: The Task Comments include any supplementary informati=
on about the task. It states if the task is Cooperative, Uncertain, or Op=
posed. It includes any modifiers which did not fit in the Task Statement.=
 It includes any additional information which may help in understanding t=
he activity and its resolution.
	Task Modifiers. Some situations may call for the incorporation of modifi=
ers in the task resolution. Modifiers may be positive or negative numbers=
=2E Positive modifiers enhance the chances for successful completion of a=
 task; negative modifiers reduce the chance of success.
	Half Dice. Difficult tasks call for throwing 21/2 dice. While specially =
marked half dice are available (they have two sides marked 1, two sides m=
arked 2, and 2 sides marked 3). For an alternative, select a six-sided di=
e of a distinctive color and designate it as the "half die." Divide any r=
esult on that die by two, rounding up: a 1 or a 2 is a 1; a 3 or a 4 is a=
 2; a 5 or 6 is 3.
=0D
	Task Difficulties: The Task Difficulty Table shows the levels of difficu=
lty possible and the associated die rolls.
=0D
TASK DIFFICULTIES
	Difficulty Level	Dice Code
	Easy		(usually automatic)
	Easy (with Default skill)	1D
	Average	2D
	Difficult	2.5D
	Formidable	3D
	Staggering	4D
	Impossible	5D
	Hopeless	6D
	Difficulty levels may be increased by hasty or decreased by cautious tas=
ks.
	When Easy Tasks Are Hard: When the sum of the skill level and the associ=
ated characteristic is less than 6, even an Easy task can be Hard. The ch=
aracter should roll for resolution of the task.
=0D
Tasks On The Fly
	Some texts refer to tasks without fully specifying them, either because =
of space constraints, or to allow the game master greater flexibility. In=
 such cases, the essentials of the task as shown in parentheses.
	For example, a checklist may indicate a series of actions and include ta=
sk details without completely specifying the tasks involved.
=0D
	3. Determine Cause of Problem. (Average, Mechanics + Strength, Uncertain=
)
=0D
DEFAULT SKILLS
	Sometimes characters need to accomplish tasks for which they do not have=
 the required skill. Any character may attempt a task which specifies a D=
efault Skill, even if the character himself does not have that skill.
	If using a Default Skill, the skill level used is 0 (zero) and the assoc=
iated characteristic is halved (round fractions up).
	For example, Eneri Dinsha (7797C7 Pilot-2), while driving a groundcar, h=
its a patch of slippery road. =

=0D
	To avoid an accident
	(Dex + Ground Craft) > Average (2D)
=0D
	Eneri has no specific skill in Ground Craft, but it is a Default Skill. =
He can attempt the task with Dex 7 halved to 4). He must roll 4 or less o=
n 2D.
	On the other hand, Eneri finds a bomb planted in the ground car. Demolit=
ions is not a Default Skill; Eneri cannot (or would not) even attempt to =
defuse it.
=0D
SPECIAL TYPES OF TASKS
	Some tasks reflect special situations which require non-standard methods=
 of resolution. These include Cooperative, Opposed, and Uncertain tasks, =
and Actions.
	Cooperative Tasks. More than one character may actively cooperate in per=
forming a single Cooperative task. Each individual cooperating contribute=
s his (or her) skill level, while one character contributes his (or her) =
characteristic. =

	The Task Comment will say Cooperative (N Skill) indicating how many char=
acters may participate (N equals the numbers of characters) and that the =
skill from each will be counted. A Task Comment may instead say Cooperati=
ve (N Characteristic) indicating how many characters may participate (N e=
quals the numbers of characters) and that the characteristic from each wi=
ll be counted. If the task is successful, all participants succeed; if it=
 fails, all participants fail.
=0D
	To camouflage a vehicle from searching police.
	(Int + Camouflage) > Difficult (2.5D)
	Cooperative (3 Camouflage).
	Up to three participants may add their skill levels together in the reso=
lution of this task. The character with the highest Int contributes that =
characteristic.
=0D
	To lift a large log off a vehicle
	(Str) > Difficult (2.5D)
	Cooperative (5 Str)
=0D
	This task requires strength alone (no skill). Up to 5 characters can par=
ticipate.
	Opposed Tasks. Characters in direct opposition may jointly participate i=
n an Opposed task, with the result determining who succeeds (and who fail=
s). Each participant rolls to resolve the task, with the highest result s=
ucceeding. =

	The Task Comment will say Opposed (N) indicating how many characters may=
 participate (N equals the numbers of characters). The highest result is =
successful, provided that result is a success result; all other participa=
nts fail (regardless of the quality of their results).
=0D
	To win a brawl.
	(Str + Brawling) > Difficult (2.5D)
	Opposed (4)
=0D
	Uncertain Tasks. Characters undertaking tasks for which the results are =
not immediately clear may participate in an Uncertain task. The referee r=
olls some of the dice secretly and determines whether the task is success=
ful. The result is only revealed when required by events. =

	The Task Comment will say Uncertain (ND), when N is the number of dice t=
he referee rolls. The remaining dice are rolled by the player. There may =
be instances where the die roll result is high enough for the player to u=
nderstand that the task was successful, or is low enough to understand th=
at the task was a failure. In some instances, however, the results will r=
emain uncertain.
=0D
	To bluff past a guard into a nuclear power plant.
	(Int + Fast Talk) +1 Fake ID > Difficult (2.5D)
	Uncertain (1D)
=0D
	The player would roll 2D and the referee would secretly roll 2D. Assumin=
g Int 7 and Fast Talk-3 and he has the Fake ID, the required roll must be=
 11 or less on 3D. If the player rolls 3, he knows he must have succeeded=
 (since even if the hidden die roll is 6, the task would succeed); if the=
 player rolls 10, he knows he must have failed (since even if the hidden =
die roll is only 1, the task would fail). But if he rolls between 6 and 9=
, he cannot know if he succeeded or failed until the referee indicates th=
e results of the third die.
	When an Uncertain task is resolved as a hasty task, the number of Uncert=
ain dice increases as the number of levels of difficulty increases. For e=
xample, If an Average difficulty Uncertain (1D) task becomes Hasty, diffi=
culty increases 1 level to Difficulty (2.5D) and Uncertainty becomes 2D.
	Actions. Activities which do not depend on character skills or character=
istics are called Actions instead of Tasks. An action is expressed like a=
 task, but the Task Statement is more free form. It indicates the informa=
tion which will be compared against the difficulty level.
	An action is identified by the word Action in the Task Comment.
=0D
	To determine initiative in space combat
	(number of ships + sensor rating) > Difficult (2.5D)
	Action. Opposed (2) This action is used in space combat.
	Tasks Without Skill. There are some tasks where an appropriate skill doe=
s not exist. For example, lifting a large object depends primarily on Str=
ength; there is no specific skill for lifting. In such cases, the task is=
 expressed and resolved based on the characteristic alone.
=0D
	To lift a large object into position.
	(Str) > Difficult (2.5D)
	No skill involved.
=0D
	There may be a problem or enigma which the characters must resolve in or=
der to move forward. Once they have the clues or evidence necessary, ther=
e are times when the adventure is best played out with the character (rat=
her than the player) solving the puzzle. For example, the player may be v=
ery smart, but the character may be extremely intellectually handicapped.=

=0D
	To puzzle out a problem (3 hours)
	(Int) > Staggering (4D)
	Uncertain (2D)
=0D
	The level of difficulty for a Task Without Skill must take into account =
that without skill, the target number will be lower than usual.
	Tasks With Skill Only. There are some tasks where the important consider=
ation is skill alone; the influence of a characteristic being minimal. Fo=
r example,
=0D
	To convince a buyer that goods are acceptable.
	(Broker) > Easy (1D)
	Fast Talk can be substituted for Broker.
=0D
	To convince a buyer that goods are acceptable.
	(Broker) + Quality > Average (2D)
	Quality may range from -5 to +5 (as specified or +D-D).
=0D
	In each case, Intelligence or Education has a minimal effect: the qualit=
y of the goods speaks for itself; Broker (or Fast Talk) merely allows the=
 character to say the right words at the right time.
	The level of difficulty for a Task With Skill Only must take into accoun=
t that with skill only, the target number will be lower than usual.
	Tasks With Optional Skill. There are some tasks where the foundation is =
a characteristic, and while a skill could improve performance that skill =
is not necessary. The word Optional is used before the skill name.
=0D
	To complete a running broad jump
	(Str + Optional Athletics) > Average (2D)
	Distance is Str + Athletics + (D-D) in Centimeters
=0D
	A person could make a running broad jump and it is primarily based on St=
rength. Skill adds to the possibility of success (and to the distance jum=
ped), but there is no penalty for not having the skill. =

	This particular type of task is in contrast resolving a task with defaul=
t skill.
	The level of difficulty for a Task With Optional Skill must take into ac=
count that with characteristic only, the target number will be lower than=
 usual.
	Multiple Skill Tasks. Some tasks can be resolved with any of several mor=
e-or-less equal skills. Other tasks incorporate several skills into the t=
ask statement and all available skills are counted.
=0D
	To apply first aid (difficult situation).
	(Edu + First Aid) > Difficult (2.5D)
	Allows possibility of Spectacular Success / Failure.
	Medical may be substituted for First Aid.
=0D
	To gather forensic evidence at the scene of a crime.
	(Int + Forensic + Perception) > Difficult (2.5D)
	Uncertain (1D)
=0D
	Special Cases: Some general rules are made to be broken. The details of =
task structure may be violated in order to achieve realistic results. For=
 example, although Dexterity and Education are associated characteristics=
 for Art, the very special task to create a true Work of Art arguably dep=
ends totally on Art skill.
=0D
	To create a Work of Art (1 month).
	(Art) > Staggering (4D)
	Special Case. =

=0D
	A special case is marked in the comment line. Art-6 has about a 1% chanc=
e of succeeding (but consider the effects of Spectacular Success if that =
occurs).
	Training, Practice, and Rehearsal. Preparation for a task through rehear=
sal (usually used with Performance), practice (used with Athletics), or t=
raining (from an expert) can be used as a die modifier. The modifier depe=
nds of the situation, but such modifiers range from 1 to 3.
=0D
SPECTACULAR RESULTS
	The results of some tasks may be spectacular in either a positive or a n=
egative sense.
	Spectacular Success. A task result may be almost perfect. If the actual =
dice roll includes 3 ones (not possible on 1D or 2D, obviously) the resul=
t is spectacularly successful. For example, a computer search not only su=
cceeds, it also stumbles on the master system password.
	Spectacular Failure. A task result may be terribly bad. If the actual di=
ce roll includes 3 sixes (not possible on 1D or 2D, obviously), the resul=
t is a spectacular failure. For example, a computer search not only fails=
, it also sets off security alarms.
	Probabilities: The probability that a task roll will result in Spectacul=
ar Success is 0.9% (slightly under 1%) for a Difficult task, and 0.46 (sl=
ightly under half a percent) for any task roll with a higher level of dif=
ficulty. There is an equal chance of a Spectacular Failure.
=0D
DURATION
	Tasks take time.
	Ignoring Duration: In many cases, the amount of time that a task takes i=
s of no consequence and is ignored. The referee can decide that the task =
will take a reasonable amount of time, and that dealing with duration wil=
l only slow down the action.
	Including Duration: When duration is important, the task should state ho=
w long it will take to attempt the task (even if it is unsuccessful).
	Hasty Tasks: If the players feel that they need to accomplish a task mor=
e quickly than normal, they can specify that they are being hasty. The ti=
me to complete the task is halved. The difficulty of the task is increase=
d one level (Average becomes Difficult, etc.). The uncertainty of tasks i=
ncreases 1D for each level of Difficulty.
	Cautious: If the players feel that they need to accomplish a task more c=
arefully than normal, they can specify that they are being cautious. The =
time to complete the task is doubled. The difficulty of the task is decre=
ased one level (Difficult becomes Average, etc.). Uncertainty in unaffect=
ed by declaring a task Cautious.
	A referee may allow a task to be declared cautious in order to decrease =
its difficulty.
=0D
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS
	Several aspects of tasks necessitate special attention.
	Jack of All Trades: One special skill confers on a character the ability=
 attempt almost any task. A person with Jack of All Trades can use that s=
kill in place of any other skill. The skill level used is two less than t=
he skill level held (but never less than 0). When Jack of All Trades is u=
sed with an effective level of 0, the process is the same as for a Defaul=
t skill (that is, the associated characteristics is halved, rounded up).
	Divided Attention: When a character attempts more than one task at once,=
 the associated characteristic is halved. For example, a sniper aiming a =
weapon and giving orders would fire with half dexterity (the order giving=
 task is Easy and probably succeeds anyway).
	Reactions: Tasks do not take place in a vacuum without regard to the rea=
ctions of other people. The Reaction Table shows initial and subsequent r=
eactions that individuals may have to tasks directed at them.
	Consequences. Task successes create positive consequences; task failures=
 create negative consequences. For tasks involving personal interactions,=
 the task comment may state Failure: Reaction+N (which creates negative r=
eactions). It may also state Success: Reaction-N (which creates a positiv=
e reaction. In each case, -N or +N is the DM for consultations to the Rea=
ctions Table.
=0D
WORKING WITH TASKS
	When working with tasks, remember the following points:
	Don't overdo pre-defined tasks. Published tasks define the levels of dif=
ficulty when resolving adventures. If there is no pre-defined task available,
it is the responsibility of the referee to create an appropriate task
or set of tasks.
	The Role Of The Referee: The referee retains (and must always be aware o=
f) a responsibility to administer the task system in a way that produces =
realistic resolutions. The referee can impose results and modifiers, brin=
g in or apply other skills or characteristics, or change difficulty level=
s in order to make the resolution of tasks. =

=0D
CREATING TASKS.
	The referee in Traveller is often called upon to create tasks as situati=
ons arise. The process for creating tasks is simple and straightforward.
	1. Express the Task Phrase. State specifically and clearly the action th=
at the players want to perform. The phrase should be no more than one lin=
e, and should encompass one specific action.
	If time is important, the time required to attempt the task should be st=
ated. This may be no time at all, or may be irrelevant (in which case, ti=
me is ignored), or it may range from 10 minutes to several hours. Typical=
ly, one task will take no more than a day.
	2. Express the Task Statement. Determine the skill required to perform t=
he task, and state the characteristic associated with that skill in this =
form: (characteristic + skill).
	Determine any modifiers which may apply to the task (such as darkness, w=
eather, computer model). Positive modifiers increase the chances of succe=
ss; negative numbers decrease the chance of success. It is possible for b=
oth positive and negative modifiers to be stated. If a significant number=
 of modifiers are to be stated, shift them to the Task Comments.
	Determine the difficulty level of the task. Using the Task Difficulty Ta=
ble, state the difficulty level of the task. Be sure to include the numbe=
r of dice to be thrown in parentheses.
Any additional information about the task should be placed in the comment=
s. State if the task is Cooperative, Opposed, or Uncertain. Include any a=
dditional modifiers which did not fit in the Task Statement.
	3. Express The Task Comments. Indicate if the task is Cooperative, Oppos=
ed, or Uncertain. Indicate if the task is an Action. Indicate any additio=
nal modifiers which did not fit on the Task Statement line.
=0D
Deciding On Difficulty Levels
	The game master, when creating tasks, needs to determine the difficulty =
level for a specific task based on a variety of circumstances. The follow=
ing are standard guidelines:
	A reasonable characteristic is in the average range: 6-7-8.
	An unskilled individual (using a default skill-0) with reasonable charac=
teristics should be able to complete an Easy task 50% of the time.
	A novice (skill-1 or so) with reasonable characteristics should be able =
to complete an easy task 75% of the time.
	A competent professional (skill-3 or so) with reasonable characteristics=
 should be able to complete a difficult task 75% of the time.
	An extremely skilled master with reasonable characteristics should be ab=
le to attempt the impossible and occasionally succeed.
	Percentages and The Real World. Characters need a chance of success. Tra=
veller is a game and it is for entertainment. If players and characters a=
re specifically frustrated in their adventures because of "realistic" per=
centages, then the situations become frustrating rather than entertaining=
 and adventuresome.
=0D
AN UNDERSTANDING OF TASKS
	A task rationally considers the probability that a character can success=
fully undertake some action. That probability depends on a skill and its =
associated characteristic.
	The base number is the characteristic; the skill achieves two objectives=
: it allows the task to be undertaken, and it raises the percentage chanc=
e that the task will be successful.
	For example, consider the interaction of skill and characteristic in a D=
ifficult (2.5D) task which requires Skill with an associated characterist=
ic of Strength.
	Strength-7 implies a base chance of 29% of accomplishing a task; but Str=
ength alone is not enough: Skill is required. Skill-1 increases the chanc=
e of accomplishing the task to 43%. Skill-2 increases that chance to 57%.=
 Skill-5 increases than chance to 82%.
	Strength-9 and Skill-3 produces the same chance of success as Strength-7=
 and Skill-5. Native strength makes up for a lower level of skill. On the=
 other hand, Strength-3 and Skill 8 also has the same chance of success a=
s Strength-7 and Skill-5. Native skill makes up for a lower level of Stre=
ngth.
	Using A Default Skill. The skill involved may be a default skill. Streng=
th-7 implies a base chance of success of 29%. If the character has no ski=
ll and must resolve based on a default skill, Strength is halved (to 4; f=
ractions round up) making the base chance of success 4%. The character ha=
s some small chance of succeeding. A smart player can make the task Cauti=
ous, reducing difficulty to Average (2D) and the chance of succeeding inc=
reases to 17%.
=0D
TASKS IN ACTION
	A character's six characteristics are a measure of that character's abil=
ity in a certain area. For example, Strength (Str) is a measure of that c=
haracter's strength: someone with Strength 2 is very weak; someone with S=
trength 12 is very strong. At the same time, the characteristic is a meas=
ure of that character's aptitude or potential to perform tasks which requ=
ire strength: someone with a high Strength is much more likely to succeed=
 when attempting a task which requires Strength.
	Demolitions is a skill governing the use of explosives; it is associated=
 with Dexterity. A character with low dexterity has a low aptitude for de=
molitions work; a character with high dexterity has a high aptitude for d=
emolitions work. When a character contemplates career skills, a low dexte=
rity character would rightly decide to avoid learning that skill. =

	Consider three characters: Three (with Dex 3); Seven (with an average De=
x 7), and Eleven (with Dex 11). Eleven has the best aptitude for the skil=
l, but without training is unable to safely interact with explosives; Thr=
ee has the worst aptitude. All three are selected to attend a class on ex=
plosives; all three successfully complete the training, and all three rec=
eive Demolitions-1.
	Consider three tasks involving explosives: Easy (the character must roll=
 equal to or less than Dex + Demolitions on 1D; Average (roll equal to or=
 less than Dex + Demolitions on 2D), and Difficult (roll equal to or less=
 than Dex + Demolitions on 2.5D). Tasks are more fully explained in the c=
hapter on Tasks.
	Easy Tasks. When Eleven tries the Easy task, he automatically succeeds (=
since Dex 11 plus Demolitions-1 =3D 12, and the worst roll possible on 1D=
 is only 6). When Seven tries the Easy task, she automatically succeeds (=
since Dex 7 plus Demolitions-1 =3D 8, and the worst roll possible on 1D i=
s only 6). Three, however is at a disadvantage: his low Dexterity 3 plus =
Demolitions-1 =3D 4 means that even on this Easy task, he has a 33% chanc=
e of failure.
	Average Tasks. When Eleven tries the Average task, he automatically succ=
eeds (since Dex 11 plus Demolitions-1 =3D 12, and the worst roll possible=
 on 2D is still 12). When Seven tries the Average task, she succeeds 72% =
of the time and fails 28% of the time (since Dex 7 plus Demolitions-1 =3D=
 8, and the possible rolls extend up to 12). Three knows (or should know)=
 better than to try an Average task (his low Dexterity 3 plus Demolitions=
- -1 =3D 4 means that on this Average task, he has an 83% chance of failure=
).
	Difficult Tasks. When Eleven tries the Difficult task, he succeeds 91% o=
f the time (since Dex 11 plus Demolitions-1 =3D 12 and the highest roll p=
ossible is 15). When Seven tries the Difficult task, she succeeds 43% of =
the time and fails 57% of the time (since Dex 7 plus Demolitions-1 =3D 8)=
=2E Three knows (or should know) better than to try an Difficult task (hi=
s low Dexterity 3 plus Demolitions-1 =3D 4 means that on this Difficult t=
ask, he has an 96% chance of failure). Spectacular Failure happens if the=
 roll is three 1's. There is, for each of these characters, a 1% chance o=
f Spectacular Failure; and a 1% chance of Spectacular Success regardless =
of skill.
	More Training. Three may decide that regardless of his aptitude, he want=
s to be a Demolitions Expert and he pursues nine years of study and pract=
ice and eventually reaches the same level of achievement as Eleven (since=
 Dex 3+ Demolitions-9 is the same as Dex 11 and Demolitions-9 when we con=
sider Demolitions as a Dexterity based activity). If Eleven made no impro=
vements in his skill, and Three made these major improvements, than Three=
 would certainly be more of an expert, with more knowledge, theoretical e=
xperience, and even practical experience; but when it came to defusing bo=
mbs, the Eleven (with Demolitions-1) and Three (with Demolitions-9) would=
 be about equal. They might make a good team: Three giving instructions a=
nd advice and Eleven doing the actual nimble finger work.
	Other Skills; Other Aptitudes. Two medically trained individuals are in =
an operating room involved in open heart surgery. Three (remember that he=
 has Dex 3) has Medical-6; Eleven (Dex 11) has Medical-1. A basic task in=
volving surgery (Average difficulty; no other modifiers) indicates that T=
hree has an 83% chance of success; Eleven has a 100% chance of success. T=
he task is probably suturing up after the operation. A different task mig=
ht be Fixing the Defective Valve (Difficult, with modifiers +2 for Good F=
acilities; +2 for Good Support Team; +2 for Good Instruments, and +1 for =
Experience and Training in this specific procedure): Three has 100% chanc=
e of success and So does Eleven. More than that, each has a 1% chance of =
Spectacular Success, and each has a 1% chance of Spectacular Failure. Ele=
ven, not being a doctor, would probably never attempt the task for fear o=
f prosecution (unlicensed practice of medicine) or lawsuits (for negligen=
ce). If Three dropped over from heart attack himself, then the emergency =
could well dictate that Eleven step in and save the patient's life. If th=
at 1% chance of Spectacular Failure doesn't come up, then Eleven looks li=
ke a hero (and probably gets sent to Medical School).
	The purpose of the Traveller task system and its mix of characteristics =
and skills is provide a means of resolving situations; the details of tho=
se situations in light of the tasks, skills, and characteristics become t=
he basis for the story-telling aspects of Traveller adventures.
=0D


UNIVERSAL TASK FORMAT
=0D
TASK PHRASE
	To accomplish an important activity (duration).
=0D
TASK STATEMENT
	(characteristic + skill) +/- modifiers > difficulty (nD)
=0D
TASK COMMENTS
	appropriate comments about the task.
=0D
	Default Skill Tasks: A character may try a task with a Default Skill, ev=
en if the character does not have that skill. Skill level used is 0 (zero=
) and the associated characteristic is halved (round fractions up).
	Cooperative Tasks. More than one character may participate in a Cooperat=
ive task. Each individual contributes his skill level, while one contribu=
tes his characteristic. Comment says Cooperative (N Skill) or (N Characte=
ristic).
	Opposed Tasks. Characters in direct opposition may try an Opposed task; =
the result determining who succeeds (and who fails). Each rolls to resolv=
e the task; the highest result succeeding. Comment will say Opposed (N) (=
N=3Dnumber of sides participating).
	Uncertain Tasks. Characters may try tasks with results which are not cle=
ar. Referee rolls some of the dice secretly and determines whether the ta=
sk is successful. The result is only revealed when required by events. Co=
mment says Uncertain (ND): N is the number of dice the referee rolls. =

		Actions. Activities which do not depend on character skills or characte=
ristics are called Actions instead of Tasks. An action is expressed like =
a task, but the Task Statement is more free form and what will be compare=
d against the difficulty level. It is identified by the comment: Action.
	Spectacular Success. If the actual dice roll includes 3 ones (not possib=
le on 2D) result is spectacular success.
	Spectacular Failure. If the actual dice roll includes 3 sixes (not possi=
ble on 2D), result is spectacular failure.
	Hasty Tasks: If players need to work more quickly than normal, they can =
specify hasty. Time is halved. Difficulty is increased one level (Average=
 becomes Difficult, etc.).
	Cautious: If the players need to work more carefully, they can specify c=
autious. Time is doubled. Difficulty is decreased one level (Difficult be=
comes Average, etc.).
=0D
REACTIONS
	Die	Initial	Subsequent
	1	Friendship (-4)	 -2 levels
	2	Total Co-op (-3)	 -2 levels
	3	Active Co-op (-2)	 -1 level
	4	Active Co-op (-2)	 -1 level
	5	Passive Co-op (-1)	 -1 level
	6	Passive Co-op (-1)	 -1 level
	7	Neutral	no change
	8	Passive Unco-op (+1)	+1 level
	9	Passive Unco-op (+1)	+1 level
	10	Active Unco-op (+2)	+1 level
	11	Active Unco-op (+2)	+1 level
	12	Violent Unco-op (+3)	+2 levels
	13	Enmity (+4)	+2 levels
Throw on this table (on the initial column) when first encountering an NP=
C. Throw once on the subsequent column once (but no earlier than the next=
 week).
DM (Initial): -2 if a veteran of the same service. -1 attendees of the sa=
me school. -1 if any Carousing skill.
DM (Subsequent): Apply the DM from the initial reaction.
=0D
TASK DIFFICULTIES
	Difficulty Level	Dice Code
	Easy		(usually automatic)
	Easy (with Default skill)	1D
	Average	2D
	Difficult	2.5D
	Formidable	3D
	Staggering	4D
	Impossible	5D
	Hopeless	6D
	Difficulty levels may be increased by hasty or decreased by cautious tas=
ks.
	When Easy Tasks Are Hard: When characteristic plus skill is less than 6,=
 roll for resolution of the task.
=0D
CHANCE OF TASK SUCCESS
		Easy	Avg	Diff	For	Sta	Imp	Hop
S+C	1D	2D	2.5D	3D	4D	5D 	6D
	1	17%	-	-	-	-	-	-
	2	33%	3%	-	-	-	-	-
	3	50%	8%	1%	<1%	-	-	-
	4	67%	17%	4%	2%	<1%	-	-
	5	83%	28%	9%	5%	<1%	<1%	-
	6	100%	42%	18%	9%	1%	<1%	<1%
	7	-	58%	29%	16%	3%	<1%	<1%
	8	-	72%	43%	26%	5%	1%	<1%
	9	-	83%	57%	38%	10%	2%	<1%
	10	-	92%	71%	50%	16%	3%	<1%
	11	-	97%	82%	63%	24%	6%	1%
	12	-	100%	91%	74%	34%	10%	2%
	13	-	-	96%	84%	44%	15%	4%
	14	-	-	99%	91%	56%	22%	6%
	15	-	-	100%	95%	66%	31%	10%
	16	-	-	-	98%	76%	40%	15%
	17	-	-	-	100%	84%	50%	21%
	18	-	-	-	-	90%	60%	28%
	19	-	-	-	-	95%	70%	36%
	20	-	-	-	-	97%	78%	45%
	21	-	-	-	-	99%	85%	55%
	22	-	-	-	-	100%	90%	64%
	23	-	-	-	-	-	94%	72%
	24	-	-	-	-	-	97%	79%
	25	-	-	-	-	-	98%	86%
	26	-	-	-	-	-	99%	90%
Add Skill (S) and characteristic (C) to read the percentage chance for su=
ccess for each difficulty level. For example Skill-5 and Characteristic-4=
 produces S+C of 9. Read the probability of success at Formidable Difficu=
lty as 38%.
=0D
CERTAINTY LEVELS
	Die	Information Dependability
	2	Complete Truth. NPC statements are objective.
	3	Complete Truth. NPC statements are objective.
	4	Partial Truth. NPC statements are opinion.
	5	Partial Truth. NPC statements are opinion.
	6	Partial Truth. NPC statements are opinion.
	7	Partial Truth. NPC statements are opinion.
	8	Partial Truth. NPC statements are opinion.
	9	No Truth. NPC statements are exaggerated.
	10	No Truth. NPC statements are exaggerated.
	11	No Truth. NPC statements are exaggerated.
	12	Lies. NPC statements are deliberate mistruth.
	13	Lies. NPC statements are deliberate mistruth.
Roll on this table for the level of certainty for information.
DM: Use the DM from the NPC reaction.
=0D
UNIVERSAL TASK FORMAT
=0D
TASK PHRASE
		To accomplish an important activity (duration).
=0D
TASK STATEMENT
		(characteristic + skill) +/- modifiers > difficulty (nD)
=0D
TASK COMMENTS
		appropriate comments about the task.
Cooperative. Opposed. Uncertain. Action. =

No skill involved. Optional skill. Special case.
=0D
TASK ELEMENTS
The referee indicates the task phrase, its required skill and characteris=
tic, and difficulty level. The player identifies the skill and characteri=
stic and determines the target number. He then personally rolls the dice =
and compares it to the target number. Low rolls are best. If the target n=
umber is greater than the die roll result, the task is successful.
=0D

DEFAULT SKILL TASKS
An unskilled character may try a task if it uses a Default Skill. Skill l=
evel is 0 (zero) and the associated characteristic is halved (round fract=
ions up).
=0D
COOPERATIVE
Several characters each contributes skill level, one contributes his char=
acteristic.
=0D
	To camouflage a vehicle from searching police.
	(Int + Camouflage) > Difficult (2.5D)
	Cooperative (3 Camouflage).
=0D
OPPOSED
Characters in direct opposition may try an Opposed task; the result deter=
mining who succeeds (and who fails). Each rolls to resolve the task; the =
highest result succeeding. =

=0D
	To win a brawl.
	(Str + Brawling) > Difficult (2.5D)
	Opposed (4)
=0D

UNCERTAIN
Characters may try tasks with results which are not clear. Referee rolls =
some of the dice secretly and determines whether the task is successful. =
The result is only revealed when required by events.
=0D
	To bluff past a guard into a nuclear power plant.
	(Int + Fast Talk) +1 Fake ID > Difficult (2.5D)
	Uncertain (1D)
=0D
ACTIONS
Activities not dependent on skills or characteristics are Actions (to dis=
tinguish them from Tasks). =

=0D
	To determine initiative in space combat
	(number of ships + sensor rating) > Difficult (2.5D)
	Action. Opposed (2) This action is used in space combat.
=0D
SPECTACULAR SUCCESS OR FAILURE
If the actual dice roll includes 3 ones (not possible on 2D) result is sp=
ectacular success.
If the actual dice roll includes 3 sixes (not possible on 2D), result is =
spectacular failure.
=0D
DURATION
	Most tasks ignore duration. When important, the task should state durati=
on (even if the task is unsuccessful).
Players can specify hasty. Time is halved. Difficulty is increased one le=
vel (Average becomes Difficult, etc.).
Players can specify cautious. Time is doubled. Difficulty is decreased on=
e level (Difficult becomes Average, etc.).
=0D
SPECIAL CASES FOR SKILL USAGE
	Without Skill. Some tasks do not require skill. =

=0D
	To lift a large object into position.
	(Str) > Difficult (2.5D)
	No skill involved.
=0D
	With Skill Only. Some tasks require skill without a characteristic. =

=0D
	To convince a buyer that goods are acceptable.
	(Broker) + Quality > Average (2D)
	Quality may range from -5 to +5 (as specified or +D-D).
=0D
	With Optional Skill. Some tasks are based on a characteristic and a skil=
l is optional. Optional is used before the skill name. =

=0D
	To complete a running broad jump
	(Str + Optional Athletics) > Average (2D)
	Distance is Str + Athletics + (D-D) in Centimeters
=0D
	With Multiple Skills. Some tasks use more than one skill at the same time. =

=0D
	To gather forensic evidence at the scene of a crime.
	(Int + Forensic + Perception) > Difficult (2.5D)
	Uncertain (1D)
=0D
SPECIAL CASES
	Some tasks violate requirements to achieve realistic results. Special Ca=
se is stated.
=0D
	To create a Work of Art (1 month).
	(Art) > Staggering (4D)
	Special Case. =

=0D
MODIFIERS
	Tasks may incorporate modifiers based on environment, equipment, or othe=
r influences.

- --PART.BOUNDARY.0.7572.emout09.mail.aol.com.873133361--

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1772
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Monday, September 1 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1773



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Sanity,Boredom and homicidal insanity
Re: Task Resolution

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 1 Sep 97 18:05 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: Sanity,Boredom and homicidal insanity

In-Reply-To: <3406FFBD.2C6F@Concentric.net>

Evyn,

> Multiple Jumps back to back. The ships captain and I (playing the ship's
> doctor)
> got in to a prank war that got very extreme. (rewiring ships systems) 
> Another player got tired of it very quickly, she was playing a Zho
> Commando.
> She tried to adjust us, we had more fun taking her mental modifications
> to
> illogical extremes. She never did that again.

My Players did that all the time. Who needs scenarios with PCs like that? 
:-)
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 13:06:04 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

- --PART.BOUNDARY.0.7572.emout09.mail.aol.com.873133361
Content-ID: <0_7572_873133362@emout09.mail.aol.com.3706>
Content-type: text/plain

Attached.


- --PART.BOUNDARY.0.7572.emout09.mail.aol.com.873133361
Content-ID: <0_7572_873133362@emout09.mail.aol.com.3707>
Content-type: text/plain;
	name="TRAV41~1.TXT"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


Tasks
	The activities which characters in Traveller adventures undertake are ca=
lled tasks. The use of tasks allows specific activities to be resolved co=
nsistently based on defined levels of difficulty and through the use of a=
ppropriate skills, characteristics, and other modifiers. Players can anal=
yze tasks and decide on the appropriate character to undertake each, base=
d on who is best suited to the task.
	Many potential tasks can be skipped over because their resolution would =
slow down the situation without providing any additional drama. The game =
referee is responsible for determining which situations actually call for=
 resolution and which can be assumed completed without difficulty or mish=
ap.
	Dice: Tasks, like all die rolls in Traveller, are resolved using six-sid=
ed dice. In some cases, a half-dice is called for. A half-die is a standa=
rd six-sided die which has been color coded to distinguish it from an ord=
inary die.
	The Synergy of Skill and Aptitude. The Traveller task resolution system =
brings together the personal aptitude represented by the individual Chara=
cteristic and the individual Skill level. Where Characteristic represents=
 natural talent, Skill represents achievement. Because a skill may be ass=
ociated with more than one Characteristic, an individual may be more tale=
nted or have more aptitude in some areas of a skill than in others. For e=
xample, Dexterity and Medical work together in surgery or therapy; Educat=
ion and Medical work together in diagnosis. A high Dexterity low Intellig=
ence character might make a good surgeon; a low Dexterity high Education =
character might make a good diagnostician; a high Dexterity high Educatio=
n character might make a good well-rounded Doctor.
=0D

AN OVERVIEW OF TASKS
	A task expresses and action or activity which characters want to underta=
ke. Each task indicates (using a specific format) what is to be attempted=
, what skills and characteristics are required, and any other information=
 necessary for an understanding of the situation.
	A typical task is
=0D
	To accomplish an important activity (duration).
	(characteristic + skill) +/- modifiers > difficulty (nD)
	appropriate comments about the task.
=0D
	Or, if translated into specific terms,
=0D
	To repair a grav vehicle.
	(Dex + Gravitics) + 1 for Tools (required) > Difficult (2.5D)
	Probably takes several hours.
=0D
	Tasks may be provided in the text, or they may be defined by the referee=
=2E
	The Dice Table. The Dice Table provides the details of die rolls for 1D,=
 2D, 2.5D. 3D, 4D, and 5D. In many cases, the referee can generate tasks =
and assign the appropriate difficulty level for the task by consulting th=
e tables.
=0D
ROLLING TASKS
	When a task becomes necessary, the referee tells the group the task, its=
 required skill and characteristic, and the difficulty level. The players=
 in the group discuss among themselves who will attempt the task. The pla=
yer running the character selected identifies the skill and characteristi=
c levels and determines the target number. He or she then personally roll=
s the dice and compares it with the target number. Low rolls are best. If=
 the die roll result is equal to or less than the target number, the task=
 is successful.
	For example, Eneri Dinsha (7797C7 Communications-2) faces the following =
task:
=0D
	To contact a ship's boat crew.
	(Edu + Communications) > Difficult (2.5D)
=0D
	The target number for the task is (11 + 2 =3D ) 13, which Eneri must rol=
l or less on 2.5D. He rolls 9, which means he succeeds in accomplishing t=
he task. =

=0D
UNIVERSAL TASK FORMAT
=0D
Task Phrase:
	To accomplish an important activity (duration).
=0D
Task Statement:
	(characteristic + skill) +/- modifiers > difficulty (nD)
=0D
Task Comments:
	appropriate comments about the task.
=0D
EXPRESSING TASKS
	Tasks can be expressed in a variety of ways, depending on the important =
elements of the specific situation. The basic expression consists of a ta=
sk phrase, a task statement, and any task comments. A typical task should=
 be stated as with these three elements on three succeeding lines.
	The Task Phrase: The Task Phrase states the specific purpose of the task=
=2E It is stated as an infinitive verb phrase (i.e. "To" followed by a ve=
rb and any modifying words). It effectively states what the character wan=
ts to do.
	If a task phrase requires more than one line, it is probably too complex=
 and should be broken into two or more separate tasks.
	The Task Phrase may contain (in parentheses) the time the task generally=
 takes to accomplish. This information is optional, and may often be igno=
red.
	The Task Statement: The Task Statement shows the specific information wh=
ich is required to resolve the task. Task resolution is based on a skill =
and its associated characteristic, applicable modifiers, and a difficulty=
 level.
The sum of the characteristic and skill and all applicable modifiers to t=
he left of the > is the target number. The player must roll equal to or l=
ess than the target number to succeed at the task.
	The Task Comments: The Task Comments include any supplementary informati=
on about the task. It states if the task is Cooperative, Uncertain, or Op=
posed. It includes any modifiers which did not fit in the Task Statement.=
 It includes any additional information which may help in understanding t=
he activity and its resolution.
	Task Modifiers. Some situations may call for the incorporation of modifi=
ers in the task resolution. Modifiers may be positive or negative numbers=
=2E Positive modifiers enhance the chances for successful completion of a=
 task; negative modifiers reduce the chance of success.
	Half Dice. Difficult tasks call for throwing 21/2 dice. While specially =
marked half dice are available (they have two sides marked 1, two sides m=
arked 2, and 2 sides marked 3). For an alternative, select a six-sided di=
e of a distinctive color and designate it as the "half die." Divide any r=
esult on that die by two, rounding up: a 1 or a 2 is a 1; a 3 or a 4 is a=
 2; a 5 or 6 is 3.
=0D
	Task Difficulties: The Task Difficulty Table shows the levels of difficu=
lty possible and the associated die rolls.
=0D
TASK DIFFICULTIES
	Difficulty Level	Dice Code
	Easy		(usually automatic)
	Easy (with Default skill)	1D
	Average	2D
	Difficult	2.5D
	Formidable	3D
	Staggering	4D
	Impossible	5D
	Hopeless	6D
	Difficulty levels may be increased by hasty or decreased by cautious tas=
ks.
	When Easy Tasks Are Hard: When the sum of the skill level and the associ=
ated characteristic is less than 6, even an Easy task can be Hard. The ch=
aracter should roll for resolution of the task.
=0D
Tasks On The Fly
	Some texts refer to tasks without fully specifying them, either because =
of space constraints, or to allow the game master greater flexibility. In=
 such cases, the essentials of the task as shown in parentheses.
	For example, a checklist may indicate a series of actions and include ta=
sk details without completely specifying the tasks involved.
=0D
	3. Determine Cause of Problem. (Average, Mechanics + Strength, Uncertain=
)
=0D
DEFAULT SKILLS
	Sometimes characters need to accomplish tasks for which they do not have=
 the required skill. Any character may attempt a task which specifies a D=
efault Skill, even if the character himself does not have that skill.
	If using a Default Skill, the skill level used is 0 (zero) and the assoc=
iated characteristic is halved (round fractions up).
	For example, Eneri Dinsha (7797C7 Pilot-2), while driving a groundcar, h=
its a patch of slippery road. =

=0D
	To avoid an accident
	(Dex + Ground Craft) > Average (2D)
=0D
	Eneri has no specific skill in Ground Craft, but it is a Default Skill. =
He can attempt the task with Dex 7 halved to 4). He must roll 4 or less o=
n 2D.
	On the other hand, Eneri finds a bomb planted in the ground car. Demolit=
ions is not a Default Skill; Eneri cannot (or would not) even attempt to =
defuse it.
=0D
SPECIAL TYPES OF TASKS
	Some tasks reflect special situations which require non-standard methods=
 of resolution. These include Cooperative, Opposed, and Uncertain tasks, =
and Actions.
	Cooperative Tasks. More than one character may actively cooperate in per=
forming a single Cooperative task. Each individual cooperating contribute=
s his (or her) skill level, while one character contributes his (or her) =
characteristic. =

	The Task Comment will say Cooperative (N Skill) indicating how many char=
acters may participate (N equals the numbers of characters) and that the =
skill from each will be counted. A Task Comment may instead say Cooperati=
ve (N Characteristic) indicating how many characters may participate (N e=
quals the numbers of characters) and that the characteristic from each wi=
ll be counted. If the task is successful, all participants succeed; if it=
 fails, all participants fail.
=0D
	To camouflage a vehicle from searching police.
	(Int + Camouflage) > Difficult (2.5D)
	Cooperative (3 Camouflage).
	Up to three participants may add their skill levels together in the reso=
lution of this task. The character with the highest Int contributes that =
characteristic.
=0D
	To lift a large log off a vehicle
	(Str) > Difficult (2.5D)
	Cooperative (5 Str)
=0D
	This task requires strength alone (no skill). Up to 5 characters can par=
ticipate.
	Opposed Tasks. Characters in direct opposition may jointly participate i=
n an Opposed task, with the result determining who succeeds (and who fail=
s). Each participant rolls to resolve the task, with the highest result s=
ucceeding. =

	The Task Comment will say Opposed (N) indicating how many characters may=
 participate (N equals the numbers of characters). The highest result is =
successful, provided that result is a success result; all other participa=
nts fail (regardless of the quality of their results).
=0D
	To win a brawl.
	(Str + Brawling) > Difficult (2.5D)
	Opposed (4)
=0D
	Uncertain Tasks. Characters undertaking tasks for which the results are =
not immediately clear may participate in an Uncertain task. The referee r=
olls some of the dice secretly and determines whether the task is success=
ful. The result is only revealed when required by events. =

	The Task Comment will say Uncertain (ND), when N is the number of dice t=
he referee rolls. The remaining dice are rolled by the player. There may =
be instances where the die roll result is high enough for the player to u=
nderstand that the task was successful, or is low enough to understand th=
at the task was a failure. In some instances, however, the results will r=
emain uncertain.
=0D
	To bluff past a guard into a nuclear power plant.
	(Int + Fast Talk) +1 Fake ID > Difficult (2.5D)
	Uncertain (1D)
=0D
	The player would roll 2D and the referee would secretly roll 2D. Assumin=
g Int 7 and Fast Talk-3 and he has the Fake ID, the required roll must be=
 11 or less on 3D. If the player rolls 3, he knows he must have succeeded=
 (since even if the hidden die roll is 6, the task would succeed); if the=
 player rolls 10, he knows he must have failed (since even if the hidden =
die roll is only 1, the task would fail). But if he rolls between 6 and 9=
, he cannot know if he succeeded or failed until the referee indicates th=
e results of the third die.
	When an Uncertain task is resolved as a hasty task, the number of Uncert=
ain dice increases as the number of levels of difficulty increases. For e=
xample, If an Average difficulty Uncertain (1D) task becomes Hasty, diffi=
culty increases 1 level to Difficulty (2.5D) and Uncertainty becomes 2D.
	Actions. Activities which do not depend on character skills or character=
istics are called Actions instead of Tasks. An action is expressed like a=
 task, but the Task Statement is more free form. It indicates the informa=
tion which will be compared against the difficulty level.
	An action is identified by the word Action in the Task Comment.
=0D
	To determine initiative in space combat
	(number of ships + sensor rating) > Difficult (2.5D)
	Action. Opposed (2) This action is used in space combat.
	Tasks Without Skill. There are some tasks where an appropriate skill doe=
s not exist. For example, lifting a large object depends primarily on Str=
ength; there is no specific skill for lifting. In such cases, the task is=
 expressed and resolved based on the characteristic alone.
=0D
	To lift a large object into position.
	(Str) > Difficult (2.5D)
	No skill involved.
=0D
	There may be a problem or enigma which the characters must resolve in or=
der to move forward. Once they have the clues or evidence necessary, ther=
e are times when the adventure is best played out with the character (rat=
her than the player) solving the puzzle. For example, the player may be v=
ery smart, but the character may be extremely intellectually handicapped.=

=0D
	To puzzle out a problem (3 hours)
	(Int) > Staggering (4D)
	Uncertain (2D)
=0D
	The level of difficulty for a Task Without Skill must take into account =
that without skill, the target number will be lower than usual.
	Tasks With Skill Only. There are some tasks where the important consider=
ation is skill alone; the influence of a characteristic being minimal. Fo=
r example,
=0D
	To convince a buyer that goods are acceptable.
	(Broker) > Easy (1D)
	Fast Talk can be substituted for Broker.
=0D
	To convince a buyer that goods are acceptable.
	(Broker) + Quality > Average (2D)
	Quality may range from -5 to +5 (as specified or +D-D).
=0D
	In each case, Intelligence or Education has a minimal effect: the qualit=
y of the goods speaks for itself; Broker (or Fast Talk) merely allows the=
 character to say the right words at the right time.
	The level of difficulty for a Task With Skill Only must take into accoun=
t that with skill only, the target number will be lower than usual.
	Tasks With Optional Skill. There are some tasks where the foundation is =
a characteristic, and while a skill could improve performance that skill =
is not necessary. The word Optional is used before the skill name.
=0D
	To complete a running broad jump
	(Str + Optional Athletics) > Average (2D)
	Distance is Str + Athletics + (D-D) in Centimeters
=0D
	A person could make a running broad jump and it is primarily based on St=
rength. Skill adds to the possibility of success (and to the distance jum=
ped), but there is no penalty for not having the skill. =

	This particular type of task is in contrast resolving a task with defaul=
t skill.
	The level of difficulty for a Task With Optional Skill must take into ac=
count that with characteristic only, the target number will be lower than=
 usual.
	Multiple Skill Tasks. Some tasks can be resolved with any of several mor=
e-or-less equal skills. Other tasks incorporate several skills into the t=
ask statement and all available skills are counted.
=0D
	To apply first aid (difficult situation).
	(Edu + First Aid) > Difficult (2.5D)
	Allows possibility of Spectacular Success / Failure.
	Medical may be substituted for First Aid.
=0D
	To gather forensic evidence at the scene of a crime.
	(Int + Forensic + Perception) > Difficult (2.5D)
	Uncertain (1D)
=0D
	Special Cases: Some general rules are made to be broken. The details of =
task structure may be violated in order to achieve realistic results. For=
 example, although Dexterity and Education are associated characteristics=
 for Art, the very special task to create a true Work of Art arguably dep=
ends totally on Art skill.
=0D
	To create a Work of Art (1 month).
	(Art) > Staggering (4D)
	Special Case. =

=0D
	A special case is marked in the comment line. Art-6 has about a 1% chanc=
e of succeeding (but consider the effects of Spectacular Success if that =
occurs).
	Training, Practice, and Rehearsal. Preparation for a task through rehear=
sal (usually used with Performance), practice (used with Athletics), or t=
raining (from an expert) can be used as a die modifier. The modifier depe=
nds of the situation, but such modifiers range from 1 to 3.
=0D
SPECTACULAR RESULTS
	The results of some tasks may be spectacular in either a positive or a n=
egative sense.
	Spectacular Success. A task result may be almost perfect. If the actual =
dice roll includes 3 ones (not possible on 1D or 2D, obviously) the resul=
t is spectacularly successful. For example, a computer search not only su=
cceeds, it also stumbles on the master system password.
	Spectacular Failure. A task result may be terribly bad. If the actual di=
ce roll includes 3 sixes (not possible on 1D or 2D, obviously), the resul=
t is a spectacular failure. For example, a computer search not only fails=
, it also sets off security alarms.
	Probabilities: The probability that a task roll will result in Spectacul=
ar Success is 0.9% (slightly under 1%) for a Difficult task, and 0.46 (sl=
ightly under half a percent) for any task roll with a higher level of dif=
ficulty. There is an equal chance of a Spectacular Failure.
=0D
DURATION
	Tasks take time.
	Ignoring Duration: In many cases, the amount of time that a task takes i=
s of no consequence and is ignored. The referee can decide that the task =
will take a reasonable amount of time, and that dealing with duration wil=
l only slow down the action.
	Including Duration: When duration is important, the task should state ho=
w long it will take to attempt the task (even if it is unsuccessful).
	Hasty Tasks: If the players feel that they need to accomplish a task mor=
e quickly than normal, they can specify that they are being hasty. The ti=
me to complete the task is halved. The difficulty of the task is increase=
d one level (Average becomes Difficult, etc.). The uncertainty of tasks i=
ncreases 1D for each level of Difficulty.
	Cautious: If the players feel that they need to accomplish a task more c=
arefully than normal, they can specify that they are being cautious. The =
time to complete the task is doubled. The difficulty of the task is decre=
ased one level (Difficult becomes Average, etc.). Uncertainty in unaffect=
ed by declaring a task Cautious.
	A referee may allow a task to be declared cautious in order to decrease =
its difficulty.
=0D
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS
	Several aspects of tasks necessitate special attention.
	Jack of All Trades: One special skill confers on a character the ability=
 attempt almost any task. A person with Jack of All Trades can use that s=
kill in place of any other skill. The skill level used is two less than t=
he skill level held (but never less than 0). When Jack of All Trades is u=
sed with an effective level of 0, the process is the same as for a Defaul=
t skill (that is, the associated characteristics is halved, rounded up).
	Divided Attention: When a character attempts more than one task at once,=
 the associated characteristic is halved. For example, a sniper aiming a =
weapon and giving orders would fire with half dexterity (the order giving=
 task is Easy and probably succeeds anyway).
	Reactions: Tasks do not take place in a vacuum without regard to the rea=
ctions of other people. The Reaction Table shows initial and subsequent r=
eactions that individuals may have to tasks directed at them.
	Consequences. Task successes create positive consequences; task failures=
 create negative consequences. For tasks involving personal interactions,=
 the task comment may state Failure: Reaction+N (which creates negative r=
eactions). It may also state Success: Reaction-N (which creates a positiv=
e reaction. In each case, -N or +N is the DM for consultations to the Rea=
ctions Table.
=0D
WORKING WITH TASKS
	When working with tasks, remember the following points:
	Don't overdo pre-defined tasks. Published tasks define the levels of dif=
ficulty when resolving adventures. If there is no pre-defined task availa=
ble, it is the responsibility of the referee to create an appropriate tas=
k or set of tasks.
	The Role Of The Referee: The referee retains (and must always be aware o=
f) a responsibility to administer the task system in a way that produces =
realistic resolutions. The referee can impose results and modifiers, brin=
g in or apply other skills or characteristics, or change difficulty level=
s in order to make the resolution of tasks. =

=0D
CREATING TASKS.
	The referee in Traveller is often called upon to create tasks as situati=
ons arise. The process for creating tasks is simple and straightforward.
	1. Express the Task Phrase. State specifically and clearly the action th=
at the players want to perform. The phrase should be no more than one lin=
e, and should encompass one specific action.
	If time is important, the time required to attempt the task should be st=
ated. This may be no time at all, or may be irrelevant (in which case, ti=
me is ignored), or it may range from 10 minutes to several hours. Typical=
ly, one task will take no more than a day.
	2. Express the Task Statement. Determine the skill required to perform t=
he task, and state the characteristic associated with that skill in this =
form: (characteristic + skill).
	Determine any modifiers which may apply to the task (such as darkness, w=
eather, computer model). Positive modifiers increase the chances of succe=
ss; negative numbers decrease the chance of success. It is possible for b=
oth positive and negative modifiers to be stated. If a significant number=
 of modifiers are to be stated, shift them to the Task Comments.
	Determine the difficulty level of the task. Using the Task Difficulty Ta=
ble, state the difficulty level of the task. Be sure to include the numbe=
r of dice to be thrown in parentheses.
Any additional information about the task should be placed in the comment=
s. State if the task is Cooperative, Opposed, or Uncertain. Include any a=
dditional modifiers which did not fit in the Task Statement.
	3. Express The Task Comments. Indicate if the task is Cooperative, Oppos=
ed, or Uncertain. Indicate if the task is an Action. Indicate any additio=
nal modifiers which did not fit on the Task Statement line.
=0D
Deciding On Difficulty Levels
	The game master, when creating tasks, needs to determine the difficulty =
level for a specific task based on a variety of circumstances. The follow=
ing are standard guidelines:
	A reasonable characteristic is in the average range: 6-7-8.
	An unskilled individual (using a default skill-0) with reasonable charac=
teristics should be able to complete an Easy task 50% of the time.
	A novice (skill-1 or so) with reasonable characteristics should be able to complete an easy task 75% of the time.
	A competent professional (skill-3 or so) with reasonable characteristics should be able to complete a difficult task 75% of the time.
	An extremely skilled master with reasonable characteristics should be able to attempt the impossible and occasionally succeed.
	Percentages and The Real World. Characters need a chance of success. Traveller is a game and it is for entertainment. If players and characters are specifically frustrated in their adventures because of "realistic" percentages, then the situations become frustrating rather than entertaining and adventuresome.

AN UNDERSTANDING OF TASKS
	A task rationally considers the probability that a character can successfully undertake some action. That probability depends on a skill and its associated characteristic.
	The base number is the characteristic; the skill achieves two objectives: it allows the task to be undertaken, and it raises the percentage chance that the task will be successful.
	For example, consider the interaction of skill and characteristic in a Difficult (2.5D) task which requires Skill with an associated characteristic of Strength.
	Strength-7 implies a base chance of 29% of accomplishing a task; but Strength alone is not enough: Skill is required. Skill-1 increases the chance of accomplishing the task to 43%. Skill-2 increases that chance to 57%. Skill-5 increases than chance to 82%.
	Strength-9 and Skill-3 produces the same chance of success as Strength-7 and Skill-5. Native strength makes up for a lower level of skill. On the other hand, Strength-3 and Skill 8 also has the same chance of success as Strength-7 and Skill-5. Native skill makes up for a lower level of Strength.
	Using A Default Skill. The skill involved may be a default skill. Strength-7 implies a base chance of success of 29%. If the character has no skill and must resolve based on a default skill, Strength is halved (to 4; fractions round up) making the base chance of success 4%. The character has some small chance of succeeding. A smart player can make the task Cautious, reducing difficulty to Average (2D) and the chance of succeeding increases to 17%.
=0D
TASKS IN ACTION
	A character's six characteristics are a measure of that character's
ability in a certain area. For example, Strength (Str) is a measure of that
character's strength: someone with Strength 2 is very weak; someone with
Strength 12 is very strong. At the same time, the characteristic is a measure
of that character's aptitude or potential to perform tasks which require
strength: someone with a high Strength is much more likely to succeed when
attempting a task which requires Strength.
	Demolitions is a skill governing the use of explosives; it is
associated with Dexterity. A character with low dexterity has a low aptitude
for demolitions work; a character with high dexterity has a high aptitude for
demolitions work. When a character contemplates career skills, a low dexterity
character would rightly decide to avoid learning that skill.

	Consider three characters: Three (with Dex 3); Seven (with an average
Dex 7), and Eleven (with Dex 11). Eleven has the best aptitude for the skill,
but without training is unable to safely interact with explosives; Three has
the worst aptitude. All three are selected to attend a class on explosives;
all three successfully complete the training, and all three receive
Demolitions-1.
	Consider three tasks involving explosives: Easy (the character must
roll equal to or less than Dex + Demolitions on 1D; Average (roll equal to or
less than Dex + Demolitions on 2D), and Difficult (roll equal to or less than
Dex + Demolitions on 2.5D). Tasks are more fully explained in the chapter on
Tasks.
	Easy Tasks. When Eleven tries the Easy task, he automatically succeeds (since Dex 11 plus Demolitions-1 =3D 12, and the worst roll possible on 1D is only 6). When Seven tries the Easy task, she automatically succeeds (since Dex 7 plus Demolitions-1 =3D 8, and the worst roll possible on 1D is only 6). Three, however is at a disadvantage: his low Dexterity 3 plus Demolitions-1 =3D 4 means that even on this Easy task, he has a 33% chance of failure.
	Average Tasks. When Eleven tries the Average task, he automatically succeeds (since Dex 11 plus Demolitions-1 =3D 12, and the worst roll possible on 2D is still 12). When Seven tries the Average task, she succeeds 72% of the time and fails 28% of the time (since Dex 7 plus Demolitions-1 =3D 8, and the possible rolls extend up to 12). Three knows (or should know) better than to try an Average task (his low Dexterity 3 plus Demolitions- -1 =3D 4 means that on this Average task, he has an 83% chance of failure).
	Difficult Tasks. When Eleven tries the Difficult task, he succeeds 91% of the time (since Dex 11 plus Demolitions-1 =3D 12 and the highest roll p=
ossible is 15). When Seven tries the Difficult task, she succeeds 43% of the time and fails 57% of the time (since Dex 7 plus Demolitions-1 =3D 8)=
=2E Three knows (or should know) better than to try an Difficult task (his low Dexterity 3 plus Demolitions-1 =3D 4 means that on this Difficult t=
ask, he has an 96% chance of failure). Spectacular Failure happens if the roll is three 1's. There is, for each of these characters, a 1% chance o=
f Spectacular Failure; and a 1% chance of Spectacular Success regardless of skill.
	More Training. Three may decide that regardless of his aptitude, he wants to be a Demolitions Expert and he pursues nine years of study and pract=
ice and eventually reaches the same level of achievement as Eleven (since Dex 3+ Demolitions-9 is the same as Dex 11 and Demolitions-9 when we con=
sider Demolitions as a Dexterity based activity). If Eleven made no improvements in his skill, and Three made these major improvements, than Three=
 would certainly be more of an expert, with more knowledge, theoretical experience, and even practical experience; but when it came to defusing bo=
mbs, the Eleven (with Demolitions-1) and Three (with Demolitions-9) would be about equal. They might make a good team: Three giving instructions a=
nd advice and Eleven doing the actual nimble finger work.
	Other Skills; Other Aptitudes. Two medically trained individuals are in an operating room involved in open heart surgery. Three (remember that he has Dex 3) has Medical-6; Eleven (Dex 11) has Medical-1. A basic task involving surgery (Average difficulty; no other modifiers) indicates that Three has an 83% chance of success; Eleven has a 100% chance of success. The task is probably suturing up after the operation. A different task might be Fixing the Defective Valve (Difficult, with modifiers +2 for Good Facilities; +2 for Good Support Team; +2 for Good Instruments, and +1 for Experience and Training in this specific procedure): Three has 100% chance of success and So does Eleven. More than that, each has a 1% chance of Spectacular Success, and each has a 1% chance of Spectacular Failure. Eleven, not being a doctor, would probably never attempt the task for fear of prosecution (unlicensed practice of medicine) or lawsuits (for negligence). If Three dropped over from heart attack himself, then the emergency could well dictate that Eleven step in and save the patient's life. If that 1% chance of Spectacular Failure doesn't come up, then Eleven looks like a hero (and probably gets sent to Medical School).
	The purpose of the Traveller task system and its mix of characteristics and skills is provide a means of resolving situations; the details of those situations in light of the tasks, skills, and characteristics become the basis for the story-telling aspects of Traveller adventures.



UNIVERSAL TASK FORMAT

TASK PHRASE
	To accomplish an important activity (duration).

TASK STATEMENT
	(characteristic + skill) +/- modifiers > difficulty (nD)

TASK COMMENTS
	appropriate comments about the task.

	Default Skill Tasks: A character may try a task with a Default Skill, even if the character does not have that skill. Skill level used is 0 (zero) and the associated characteristic is halved (round fractions up).
	Cooperative Tasks. More than one character may participate in a Cooperative task. Each individual contributes his skill level, while one contributes his characteristic. Comment says Cooperative (N Skill) or (N Characteristic).
	Opposed Tasks. Characters in direct opposition may try an Opposed task; the result determining who succeeds (and who fails). Each rolls to resolve the task; the highest result succeeding. Comment will say Opposed (N) (N=3Dnumber of sides participating).
	Uncertain Tasks. Characters may try tasks with results which are not clear. Referee rolls some of the dice secretly and determines whether the task is successful. The result is only revealed when required by events. Comment says Uncertain (ND): N is the number of dice the referee rolls.

		Actions. Activities which do not depend on character skills or characteristics are called Actions instead of Tasks. An action is expressed like a task, but the Task Statement is more free form and what will be compared against the difficulty level. It is identified by the comment: Action.
	Spectacular Success. If the actual dice roll includes 3 ones (not possible on 2D) result is spectacular success.
	Spectacular Failure. If the actual dice roll includes 3 sixes (not possible on 2D), result is spectacular failure.
	Hasty Tasks: If players need to work more quickly than normal, they can specify hasty. Time is halved. Difficulty is increased one level (Average becomes Difficult, etc.).
	Cautious: If the players need to work more carefully, they can specify cautious. Time is doubled. Difficulty is decreased one level (Difficult becomes Average, etc.).

REACTIONS
	Die	Initial	Subsequent
	1	Friendship (-4)	 -2 levels
	2	Total Co-op (-3)	 -2 levels
	3	Active Co-op (-2)	 -1 level
	4	Active Co-op (-2)	 -1 level
	5	Passive Co-op (-1)	 -1 level
	6	Passive Co-op (-1)	 -1 level
	7	Neutral	no change
	8	Passive Unco-op (+1)	+1 level
	9	Passive Unco-op (+1)	+1 level
	10	Active Unco-op (+2)	+1 level
	11	Active Unco-op (+2)	+1 level
	12	Violent Unco-op (+3)	+2 levels
	13	Enmity (+4)	+2 levels
Throw on this table (on the initial column) when first encountering an NPC. Throw once on the subsequent column once (but no earlier than the next week).
DM (Initial): -2 if a veteran of the same service. -1 attendees of the same school. -1 if any Carousing skill.
DM (Subsequent): Apply the DM from the initial reaction.

TASK DIFFICULTIES
	Difficulty Level	Dice Code
	Easy		(usually automatic)
	Easy (with Default skill)	1D
	Average	2D
	Difficult	2.5D
	Formidable	3D
	Staggering	4D
	Impossible	5D
	Hopeless	6D
	Difficulty levels may be increased by hasty or decreased by cautious tasks.

	When Easy Tasks Are Hard: When characteristic plus skill is less than 6, roll for resolution of the task.

CHANCE OF TASK SUCCESS
		Easy	Avg	Diff	For	Sta	Imp	Hop
S+C	1D	2D	2.5D	3D	4D	5D 	6D
	1	17%	-	-	-	-	-	-
	2	33%	3%	-	-	-	-	-
	3	50%	8%	1%	<1%	-	-	-
	4	67%	17%	4%	2%	<1%	-	-
	5	83%	28%	9%	5%	<1%	<1%	-
	6	100%	42%	18%	9%	1%	<1%	<1%
	7	-	58%	29%	16%	3%	<1%	<1%
	8	-	72%	43%	26%	5%	1%	<1%
	9	-	83%	57%	38%	10%	2%	<1%
	10	-	92%	71%	50%	16%	3%	<1%
	11	-	97%	82%	63%	24%	6%	1%
	12	-	100%	91%	74%	34%	10%	2%
	13	-	-	96%	84%	44%	15%	4%
	14	-	-	99%	91%	56%	22%	6%
	15	-	-	100%	95%	66%	31%	10%
	16	-	-	-	98%	76%	40%	15%
	17	-	-	-	100%	84%	50%	21%
	18	-	-	-	-	90%	60%	28%
	19	-	-	-	-	95%	70%	36%
	20	-	-	-	-	97%	78%	45%
	21	-	-	-	-	99%	85%	55%
	22	-	-	-	-	100%	90%	64%
	23	-	-	-	-	-	94%	72%
	24	-	-	-	-	-	97%	79%
	25	-	-	-	-	-	98%	86%
	26	-	-	-	-	-	99%	90%
Add Skill (S) and characteristic (C) to read the percentage chance for su=
ccess for each difficulty level. For example Skill-5 and Characteristic-4=
 produces S+C of 9. Read the probability of success at Formidable Difficu=
lty as 38%.

CERTAINTY LEVELS
	Die	Information Dependability
	2	Complete Truth. NPC statements are objective.
	3	Complete Truth. NPC statements are objective.
	4	Partial Truth. NPC statements are opinion.
	5	Partial Truth. NPC statements are opinion.
	6	Partial Truth. NPC statements are opinion.
	7	Partial Truth. NPC statements are opinion.
	8	Partial Truth. NPC statements are opinion.
	9	No Truth. NPC statements are exaggerated.
	10	No Truth. NPC statements are exaggerated.
	11	No Truth. NPC statements are exaggerated.
	12	Lies. NPC statements are deliberate mistruth.
	13	Lies. NPC statements are deliberate mistruth.
Roll on this table for the level of certainty for information.
DM: Use the DM from the NPC reaction.

UNIVERSAL TASK FORMAT

TASK PHRASE
		To accomplish an important activity (duration).

TASK STATEMENT
		(characteristic + skill) +/- modifiers > difficulty (nD)

TASK COMMENTS
		appropriate comments about the task.
Cooperative. Opposed. Uncertain. Action. =

No skill involved. Optional skill. Special case.

TASK ELEMENTS
The referee indicates the task phrase, its required skill and characteris=
tic, and difficulty level. The player identifies the skill and characteri=
stic and determines the target number. He then personally rolls the dice =
and compares it to the target number. Low rolls are best. If the target n=
umber is greater than the die roll result, the task is successful.


DEFAULT SKILL TASKS
An unskilled character may try a task if it uses a Default Skill. Skill l=
evel is 0 (zero) and the associated characteristic is halved (round fract=
ions up).

COOPERATIVE
Several characters each contributes skill level, one contributes his characteristic.

	To camouflage a vehicle from searching police.
	(Int + Camouflage) > Difficult (2.5D)
	Cooperative (3 Camouflage).

OPPOSED
Characters in direct opposition may try an Opposed task; the result deter=
mining who succeeds (and who fails). Each rolls to resolve the task; the =
highest result succeeding.


	To win a brawl.
	(Str + Brawling) > Difficult (2.5D)
	Opposed (4)


UNCERTAIN
Characters may try tasks with results which are not clear. Referee rolls =
some of the dice secretly and determines whether the task is successful. =
The result is only revealed when required by events.
=0D
	To bluff past a guard into a nuclear power plant.
	(Int + Fast Talk) +1 Fake ID > Difficult (2.5D)
	Uncertain (1D)

ACTIONS
Activities not dependent on skills or characteristics are Actions (to dis=
tinguish them from Tasks). =


	To determine initiative in space combat
	(number of ships + sensor rating) > Difficult (2.5D)
	Action. Opposed (2) This action is used in space combat.

SPECTACULAR SUCCESS OR FAILURE
If the actual dice roll includes 3 ones (not possible on 2D) result is spectacular success.
If the actual dice roll includes 3 sixes (not possible on 2D), result is spectacular failure.

DURATION
	Most tasks ignore duration. When important, the task should state duration (even if the task is unsuccessful).
Players can specify hasty. Time is halved. Difficulty is increased one level (Average becomes Difficult, etc.).
Players can specify cautious. Time is doubled. Difficulty is decreased one level (Difficult becomes Average, etc.).

SPECIAL CASES FOR SKILL USAGE
	Without Skill. Some tasks do not require skill. =

=0D
	To lift a large object into position.
	(Str) > Difficult (2.5D)
	No skill involved.

	With Skill Only. Some tasks require skill without a characteristic.


	To convince a buyer that goods are acceptable.
	(Broker) + Quality > Average (2D)
	Quality may range from -5 to +5 (as specified or +D-D).

	With Optional Skill. Some tasks are based on a characteristic and a skill is optional. Optional is used before the skill name.


	To complete a running broad jump
	(Str + Optional Athletics) > Average (2D)
	Distance is Str + Athletics + (D-D) in Centimeters

	With Multiple Skills. Some tasks use more than one skill at the same time.


	To gather forensic evidence at the scene of a crime.
	(Int + Forensic + Perception) > Difficult (2.5D)
	Uncertain (1D)

SPECIAL CASES
	Some tasks violate requirements to achieve realistic results. Special Case is stated.

	To create a Work of Art (1 month).
	(Art) > Staggering (4D)
	Special Case. =


MODIFIERS
	Tasks may incorporate modifiers based on environment, equipment, or other influences.

- --PART.BOUNDARY.0.7572.emout09.mail.aol.com.873133361--

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1773
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Monday, September 1 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1774



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

CSC COACC Fighter
Re: Universal Range Bands
Vilani, Zhodani, Disease (oh my!) (long)
Re: Keanou
Re: Keanou
Re: K'Kows and the Hresh
Re: Conspiracy theory
Re: Conspiracy theory
Re: Task Resolution
Re: Near-C missiles?
Re: Keanou
FFS2 Spreadsheets?
Re: Sea Bears
[none]
Re: B5 Release Dates
Sylea and Gaar
Late Digest response - Re: Winded
Hypersonic grav skateboards...
Re: Keanou
Alternaties (B5, ME, House, .pdf)  (was RE: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!))
Re: Sea Bears
Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 10:07:08 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: CSC COACC Fighter

This started as simply an experiment to see exactly how fast I could make
something go. Once I had I saw there was a ton of space left over, so what
was there to do but add a bunch of weapons and missiles ;-) The pilot can
pull 8 or 9 gee's of acceleration, since 6 are comp'ed, and before I added
all the weapons and sensors, this thing had a top speed of over Mach 5. As
it is, it still does Mach 4.7

Rule3, Inc. Kite air/space superiority fighter:

air/space fighter (TL12)
Designed by Bruce Johnson

Summary:
     27.80 displacement ton disk streamlined;  350 tonnes;  MCr 12.3
Chassis:
     389 kL disk streamlined (13 m long x 13 m wide x 2.7 m high);
Structure: 51.6 tonnes of crystaliron, rated for 15.0Gs, body 0.04 cm
thick, sealed to 1 atm, 3 armour rating
     
Performance:
     93.3 MW TL12 Fusion Plus power plant;  Fuel: 699 L of enriched water
(699 kg), 24 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 74.0 MW contragrav;  Maximum Speed: 5748 km/h;
Range: 137415 km;  Agility: -27DM
Crew:
     Crew roster: pilot;  1 crew station (1.5 cm of Crystaliron armour,
rating 10) 6G grav compensation, basic life support.
Armament:
     Weapon                          Damage    Range          Shots  Reloads   Notes
     Missile, Heavy-11               41 (27 expVery Long      1       25 +4DM, remote
     Plasma Cannon, Lt Veh-11        44 (11 expExtremely Long         1000 +4DM, remote
     Missile, Heavy-11               41 (27 expVery Long      1       25 +4DM, remote
Communications:
     Orbital Laser (10.00 kW, TL12, SmVcl)
Sensors:
     Active Orbital Lidar (1.00 MW)  Resolution: 0.050 mm per km of range
     Passive Orbital Optical (10.00 kW, MilSpec)  Resolution: 0.050 mm per
km of range
     Active Continental Jammer (100 kW, MilSpec)  Resolution: 0.200 mm per
km of range
Other:
     120 kL of cargo space


Designed with CSC (software )Robert Prior, 1997)

Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 13:31:04 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Universal Range Bands

In a message dated 97-09-01 10:29:19 EDT, you write:

<<  If folks can handle SYLK files, I'll post the spreadsheet.  >>

Yes! Please post it.

Thanks,

Marc

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 12:54:27 -0500 (CDT)
From: Joseph "Chepe" Lockett <jlockett@io.com>
Subject: Vilani, Zhodani, Disease (oh my!) (long)

Phillip McGregor and Leonard Erickson seem to be going at it quite well: I
just thought I'd post a few clarifications or different interpretations.

First off, re: Vilani food processing.  It was always my impressions that
Vilani food, unprepared, was not so much _toxic_ (a la blowfish) as merely
_unnutritious_ (a la cellulose).  I'm sure there was at least some amount
of the former (and "new" T4 canon seems to imply such), but I find it hard
to believe that the Vilani could have done what they did in a completely
toxic biosphere.

Next, re: the Zhodani-Droyne plague.  The CT Module clearly states that it
was _not_ a natural disease so much as an ancient-designed bioweapon that
was misdelivered: "an agent specific to Qiknavrats [the Zhdant-native
Chirpers] was carried by the Viepchaklts [the Chirpers native to Zhdant's
moon]; and an agent specific to the Viepchaklts was carried by the
Qiknavrats.  When they met [after early Zhodani/Chirper orbital flights],
the biological agents began to work....  Apparently, biological agents
specific to each type of Droyne were drop-launched during the Final War,
but each went to the wrong world; they then waited as a bacteriological
time bomb waiting for the two branches of the same race to make contact." 
(p.7)  The disease _did_ cross over to humans (as an Ancient bioweapon
well might!), killing a third of the population within two years and two
thirds within ten.  "By -7940 Zhdant had entered a second Dark Age." (p.7) 

We can certainly argue the likelihood of Droyne "races" remaining distinct
enough through the Ancients' reign to allow tailored plagues (kind of like
staffing neighboring worlds with genetically pure Amerinds and Hamitics?).
And we can wonder why the plague didn't re-erupt after contact with the
Vargr five thousand years later (-2800) or the Vilani shortly after that
(-2000).  Perhaps it's an Ancient Plot Device that burns itself out after
the intended effect?  :-P

All that said, I agree that the Arishshiir virus in GATEWAY is ridiculous.
The Sevalid pseudocentipedes, as natives to the world, must use a genetic
code which, while possibly similar in _mechanism_ (I'd take DNA as the
base molecule) is almost surely entirely different in _detail_ (i.e. base-
pair coding and, possibly, even amino acids used!).  Viri don't do much
but hijack other organisms' genetic mechanisms, and since humaniti's must
be incompatible with the virus', it stops right there.  Why is hard-
science Traveller so careful with physics and mechanics but so oft sloppy
with biology?

(I don't know enough about the specifics of viral DNA getting into the
nucleus, splicing itself into the genome, etc. -- could it be that the
virus _does_ infect, on a lucky day with Hell frozen over, but then
produces only junk instead of new virus, and the junk proves toxic to the
nevertheless-non-infectious host?  I'd take that as a rare enough event
not to disrupt "canonical" history and good sense.)

I'd also take the Arishshiir infection as a _bacterium_ rather than a
virus.  I'm sure the empire-building Vilani had to cope with all manner of
extraterrestrial athletes' foot, Montezuma's revenge, etc., and they're
probably quite familiar with quarantine, disease detection, antibiotics,
etc. as they pertain to _bacterial_ infections.

To me, though, the sheer horror of the Interstellar Wars (where I'm one of
those who consider biowar rare and probably mostly accidental) and then of
the Plague of Duskir, is the arrival of a human race with _things_
crawling around their genetic code, leaping to other humans to take them
over.  Filthy and unclean!  AIDS research already despairs over actually
_removing_ the virus from all over the body, where it lays dormant hidden
in the nuclei of countless thousands of cells.

I could easily see high-tech intrusive genetic-level virus-snippers
missing a few representatives of our massive viral bestiary, as thousands
on thousands of bureaucrats fan out into the conquered Ziru Sirka to meet
new subjects with no viral defense whatsoever... thus the Plague. 

- ----------------------------*------------------------*------------------------
 Joseph L. "Chepe" Lockett  |"Nullum magnum ingenium | GURPS fan, Amiga user,
http://www.io.com/~jlockett | sine mixtura dementiae | Shakespearean scholar,
  Email: jlockett@io.com    | fuit." -- Seneca       | actor and director.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 01 Sep 1997 11:18:25 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Keanou

At 05:06 PM 9/1/97 +0200, you wrote:

>Can anybody suggests how a planet can go from 4 to 15% open water in 5 years
>or less?

They left for vaction and forgot to turn off the bath?


- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 20:45:00 +0100
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: Re: Keanou

>The planet Keanou (Spinward Marches 2411) is a problem to me. In _Spinward
>Marches_, _Twilight's Peak_, and _The Traveller Adventure_ its hydrographics
>score is 0, indicating that around 1105 it had a maximum of 4% free-standing
>water. But in _Spinward Marches Campaign_ and the _Regency Sourcebook_ it
>has a hydrographics score of 2, indicating that in 1110 (and 1202) it had a
>minimum of 15% free-standing water.
>
>Can anybody suggests how a planet can go from 4 to 15% open water in 5 years
>or less?

Maybe the IISS made a superficial Survey of the planet and noted neither
free standing water nor icecaps but a more thorough check (by a hapless
misjumper searching  for water to make fuel etc) revealed that beneath a
thin surface of sand/dust deposited by very heavy volcanism lay a thick
layer of ice around the poles.

The UWP was updated, and IISS promised the emperor to take a long hard look
at their quality control practices regarding survey data (and then ignoring
the issue wholeheartedly of course).

Some smugglers might have bribed the IISS to keep the 0% hyd figure so that
nobody would suspect them for using the planet as a refuelling place during
their smuggling runs.


/Anders Backman
Aniware AB
anders.backman@aniware.se

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 01 Sep 1997 12:27:33 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: K'Kows and the Hresh

Hello,
>Now, part of the K'Kree superiority complex has been their herbivore
>nature - they simply eat plants. So what would they think of sophont plants?
>
>Your opinions would be appreciated.

  Hmm. They could a) ignore them and the potential for ethical problems
about eating plants :), b) pretend not to understand the question, c)
treat them as an herbivorous species, which can lead to d), integrate
them into their religious beliefs (JTAS #?) as being prime candidates
for inheriting K'kree stewardship of the galaxy when the herd is done
with it.

  Have fun.
        Steven Hudson
        

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 1 Sep 97 20:52 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: Conspiracy theory

In-Reply-To: <l03020903b02fa113a277@[198.168.189.45]>

Roderick,

> >>       Harold's not bullshitting us, guys.  Di in a car fleeing papparazzi
> >>in Paris, driver lost control, boom.
> >>
> >>       Will spend day at work developing conspiracy theories and post in
> >>evening.

This is both off-topic and in bad taste. Please stop.
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 01 Sep 1997 21:19:11 +0100
From: Simon Early <sre@taz.compulink.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Conspiracy theory

Carry on with the conspiracy theories - they do not upset me.  To avoid 
upsetting others, could all posters put thirty or so carriage returns 
in at the start of their e-mail so that only the interested need page 
down to read them.

Thousands of people are killed on the roads every year, and each one of 
them is a sad loss to those who loved them.


Simon (in the UK)
Di fan
anti-landmine supporter
sad to see Di go

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 21:23:05 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

> OK, this is my last post.  
> [More stuff where Kevin posts insults deleted.]


No problem, Darren.

Kenneth.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 01 Sep 1997 17:04:08 -0400
From: Daniel Ray Lane <drlane@pinn.net>
Subject: Re: Near-C missiles?

Roderick Darroch Elliott wrote:

> Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>


No, but they could use Lorentz force steering.  The higher the velocity
the higher the deflection force in a mag field.

- -Dan Lane

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 01 Sep 1997 17:01:43 -0400
From: Daniel Ray Lane <drlane@pinn.net>
Subject: Re: Keanou

Hans Rancke-Madsen wrote:
> 
> The planet Keanou (Spinward Marches 2411) is a problem to me. In _Spinward
> Marches_, _Twilight's Peak_, and _The Traveller Adventure_ its hydrographics
> score is 0, indicating that around 1105 it had a maximum of 4% free-standing
> water. But in _Spinward Marches Campaign_ and the _Regency Sourcebook_ it
> has a hydrographics score of 2, indicating that in 1110 (and 1202) it had a
> minimum of 15% free-standing water.
> 
> Can anybody suggests how a planet can go from 4 to 15% open water in 5 years
> or less?
> 
>       Hans Rancke
> University of Copenhagen
>      rancke@diku.dk
> ------------
>         "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
>          events based on the individual situation."
>                                 _76 Patrons_, p. 8
> 

Highly eccentric orbit resulting in close passage to its primary
star (or perhaps a close companion, dwarf, or gas giant).  Close
passage results in relaease of previously frozen underground ice
deposits.

Or, how about a big ice asteroid hydrofication project.

- -Dan Lane

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 01 Sep 1997 14:49:00 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: FFS2 Spreadsheets?

Has anyone done an Excel spreadsheet for FFS2 yet?  I seem to remember
hearing one mentioned in passing...
- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 01 Sep 1997 14:43:34 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Sea Bears

I agree with your general approach on the Zhodani colonization plans for
the Spinward Marches area.. could it be that their intervention is the
reason there are so many habital planets.. long term seeding with
biological packages, aka the Mars trilogy.

As for the Sea Bears, maybe they just liked the things?  I have a friend
who raises chiuhuas (sp?) the most useless bundles of protein ever
assembled on Earth, but she loves the little walking menaces...

Perhaps the thought patterns of Sea Bears was soothing/erotic/interesting
to the Nobles, and they brought them with them as pets.  When the Imperium
muscled in, the Sea Bears had become entrenched on the appropriate Zhodani
worlds, and survived their masters' departure.
- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 01 Sep 1997 16:33:28 -0600
From: Gregory Horrell <ghorrell@xmission.com>
Subject: [none]

subscribe traveller digest

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 20:11:16 -0800
From: "Zane H. Healy" <healyzh@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: B5 Release Dates

>At 02:26 AM 8/31/97 +0000, Rob Prior wrote:
>>This is actually semi-on-topic, because I like the B5 combat system
>>(realistic
>>wounding effects, according to my paramedic relatives) and I've heard that
>>the starship combat is fast, fun, and feels Travellerish (whatever that
>>means).
>>
>>So, does anyone know when anything other than the basic rulebook will be
>>released???
>>
>
>I have seen a boxed set of ship minitures & rules at the FLGS; but at a $35+
>price, it has remained at the FLGS.

Wow, I'd forgotten about that.  If it's the product that I'm thinking of
it's actually from a different company.  They are supposed to be coming out
with a whole line of miniatures.  The mini's and rules are supposed to be
quite nice, I remember reading about it about 6-8 months ago when it was
still in development.  The actual star ship combat rules are supposed to be
in the Earth Forces sourcebook and are based on the "Full Thrust" rules if
I remember correctly.  Ought to make it nice and confusing having two
different sets of rules that do the same thing, then again how many sets of
rules are there for Traveller that do the same thing :^)

		Zane

| Zane H. Healy                    | UNIX Systems Adminstrator |
| healyzh@ix.netcom.com (primary)  | Linux Enthusiast          |
| healyzh@holonet.net (alternate)  | Mac Programmer            |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------+
| For Empire of the Petal Throne, and Traveller Role Playing   |
| see http://www.dragonfire.net/~healyzh/                      |

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 18:13:58 -0500
From: "Ernest N Rowland" <erowland@ionet.net>
Subject: Sylea and Gaar

Can anyone tell me why Gaar (Core - 2729 C360211-A) is part of the Sylean
Federation when it is
13 parsecs from the next nearest Sylean world?  It's shown this way in both
"First Survey",
and "Milieu 0" - but I have been unable to find any references to it in the
text.  Thanks.

- -- <...but pity stayed his hand.  "It's a pity I've run out of bullets," he
thought...> - BOTR xxii

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 2 Sep 1997 00:44:15 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Late Digest response - Re: Winded

James Lindsay wrote:

>> Slugs do not have a lot of kinetic energy. What they have is a lot of
>>momentum.
>
>This isn't true.  Momentum is directly related to kinetic energy.  As
>momentum is lost, so is kinetic energy.  If a projectile has lots of
>momentum, it also has lots of KE.
>
>I'm not sure what (if any) units are used to measure "momentum".
>Kinetic Energy, OTOH, is easily calculated using a simple formula:
>
>        2
>KE=0.5MV
>
>With it, you can calculate the KE of a bullet or a bowling ball.


Momentum is measured in Kg m/s

Mom = MV

KE=1/2 M (V^2)

Both are related to mass (M) and velocity (V). KE is a derivation of this
value.

When a bullet impacts, momentum will be conserved ie

Mom(pre-impact) = mom(post-impact of body) + mom(post impact of bullet)

Dependent on what fraction of KE is transfered to the body you can then
work back through the equations and get an approximation of the impact
effects. (Approximation as you would really need to look at the bending
moment acting around the pivot of the victims feet, which would resist the
impact woth friction. You then have to take into account the physiological
effects on the body like reflex responses... You can do the math - me, I
just assume the player is knocked over in shock!)


- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"Omnia Mutantur Nihil Interit"  -  Sandman 'The Wake'
"Everything Changes, but nothing is truly lost" 

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 17:44:11 -0500
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: Hypersonic grav skateboards...

Bruce Johnson wrote:

>
>Dammit Rod!
>
>You beat me to it!
>
>Not mentioned in this is the safety harness and tether that I'm _sure_
>those homiciadal maniacs at Spofulam left out. But the controls are
>presumed to work in the same fashion.
[snippage]

	Well, the thing is is that my grav skateboard only had a top speed
of about 76 kph; at those speeds it might be possible not to be blown off
the board.  Once you start hitting 97 or 4500 kph, harnesses start becoming
a neccessity :).

	Actually, I've just come up with a criticism of CSC for Rob;
unfortunately, the .01 td lower size limit prevents us from designing
Fusion+/T-plate Rollerblades...

	I must be slowing down here; why didn't _I_ think of putting the
biggest possible drive in my skateboard...  It's a great idea though; on a
vacuum world you could have all sorts of fun with a High Perf S.A.T. grav
skateboard or two.  A combat involving a couple of those and a few gauss
pistols and a big Valles Marineris-like canyon could really liven up an
evening's roleplaying, heheheh... >:)

Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 1 Sep 97 18:30:22 -0600
From: Glenn Hoppe <starcity@sk.sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: Keanou

On 1997-09-01 09:06, Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk> posted the 
following:

>The planet Keanou (Spinward Marches 2411) is a problem to me. In _Spinward
>Marches_, _Twilight's Peak_, and _The Traveller Adventure_ its hydrographics
>score is 0, indicating that around 1105 it had a maximum of 4% free-standing
>water. But in _Spinward Marches Campaign_ and the _Regency Sourcebook_ it
>has a hydrographics score of 2, indicating that in 1110 (and 1202) it had a
>minimum of 15% free-standing water.
>
>Can anybody suggests how a planet can go from 4 to 15% open water in 5 years
>or less?
>

1. Cometary impact

2. Typographic Error.

3. Water frozen beneath the surface, massive planetary heating (solar 
disturbance, runaway greenhouse?)

4. Somebody mistyped or miscanned the original.

5. Increased vulcanism drives water underground into the air through huge 
geysers.

6. Typo.

7. Scouts changed the way they measure the hyd. percentage. They now take 
the planetary ice caps into account.

8. Mistake.

9. Combination of 3+5.

10. Combination of 1 and 5.

11. Combination of 2,4,6 and 8.



- -- 
===== Glenn Hoppe =====\ /--- MailTo:jumpspace@geocities.com ----
\ . . Enter Jumpspace --X-> http://www.geocities.com/Area51/8275 \
 ----------------------/ \========== Eschew Obfuscation ==========

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 19:41:54 -0500
From: David Reed <david@techrefuge.com>
Subject: Alternaties (B5, ME, House, .pdf)  (was RE: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!))

James:

I took your challenge, and perused, thoroughly, my copy of B5.  *shudder* 
 Having NEVER watched the show, I'm somewhat intrigued by some of the 
tech, bemused by the PPG nonsense, and, well, I'll leave the aliens out of 
it.

> >  ME is all %tile.  The wound rules are very complex, but realistic.
> >  One chart for all blood loss, shock, stun, broken bones, etc.
>
> You mean all of these on *one* nice chart that deals with injuries
> after combat, with temporary modifiers used until the battle is over,
> correct?

The ME table is not nearly so forgiving as B5's TWO tables.  ME's requires 
all of the figurin' to be done at wound-time.

My only complaint (it's really a nice SET of tables) is that it has too 
little randomness in injuries, or task resolution all together.  Plus or 
minus 5 on a scale of anywhere from 2 to 25 difficulty?  This really never 
allows for "space opera" for one thing.  The author noted that the 
characters "would most often operate close to their ability" wasn't 
joshing!  If they try anything much harder, they're not likely to succeed!

The B5 wound rules suffer from the same "stale lethality" (*rofl*  You 
should've seen my recent post to the T2k list about a wounded PC) as the 
ME rules.  Not to say that it's not believable that "you get shot, you 
die" but players tend to take that kinda hard.  Scratch and slight wounds 
are much more tension building than instant incapacitation.

> You really have to simply sit down with a pair of dice and throw them
> a couple of times to get used to the technique (give it an honest
> shot).  It becomes quite easy after that.  The only problem is that
> the dice rolling is handled so uniquely that it can be somewhat
> difficult going from T4 or AD&D (systems that count the values
> displayed on the dice and add them up) to TBP, and back.

I did, and once I figured out the concept, it's kinda neat, but...  for 
the difficulty levels, there's too little randomness.  I haven't generated 
a character yet, but you'd have to have Jedi stats and skills AND a kick 
ass roll (5 and 6) to ever achieve a "miraculous" task; which PCs like to 
pull off once in a while.

I'll probably stick with house rules...  I like d20 too much to give 'em 
up.  Right, Harold?

Even though I'm boycotting CEE (well, not really), they did a great job 
with the .pdf versions of the character sheets, etc. for ALL of their 
games.  Something I'd like to see more gaming companies do (*hint* 
*hint*).  My laser printer does FAR better than any copy machine I can 
afford to use at Kinkos (and it doesn't stick to the friggin' binders!).
______________________________________________________________________

David Reed           | All wickedness is weakness: that plea therefore
                     | With God or Man will gain thee no remission.
david@techrefuge.com |                -John Milton, "Samson Agonistes"
______________________________________________________________________

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 19:49:58 -0500 (CDT)
From: Joseph "Chepe" Lockett <jlockett@io.com>
Subject: Re: Sea Bears

Quoth Hans Rancke-Madsen:
> [Seabears] had "been used in pre-imperial colonization projects in the 
> Jewell, Lianic, and Massina subsectors" (All subsectors adjacent to Chronor).
> I decided that the only two possibilities (that we know of) for having
> performed these colonization projects were the Ancients and the Zhodani,

You're missing one -- "pre-Imperial" need not mean "prior to the founding
of the Third Imperium."  It could just as easily refer to colonization
projects carried out before Chronor was formally integrated into the
Imperium.  CT Supplement 11's "History of the Spinward Marches" (which I
presume you're using as a preliminary source) shows Imperial settlers
arriving in Chronor subsector by c. 400 Imperial, with formal Imperial
annexation lagging at least a century behind colonization.

Later in CT-S11's essay, we learn that the First Frontier War (589 to 604)
"caught the Imperium less than fully prepared and quickly expelled
Imperial settlements from Zhodani territories beyond the Spinward Marches
Sector boundaries....  Ultimately, armistice lines were drawn, ceding
portions of the Cronor subsector to the Zhodani."  (p. 40)  So both the
map and the text imply some Imperial settlement well past Chronor's
"corner" of the sector.

That said, I still rather like Doug Berry's psychically soothing
sea-bears, for the alliterative as much as the imaginative value.... :-)

- ----------------------------*------------------------*------------------------
 Joseph L. "Chepe" Lockett  |"Nullum magnum ingenium | GURPS fan, Amiga user,
http://www.io.com/~jlockett | sine mixtura dementiae | Shakespearean scholar,
  Email: jlockett@io.com    | fuit." -- Seneca       | actor and director.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 02 Sep 1997 01:04:43 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!)

On Mon, 01 Sep 1997 08:51:42 -0700, Douglas E. Berry wrote:

> If he declared he was going down to the intersection as a single action,
> then he would have spent 5AP and finsihed that action.  Then he could have
> declared "I'm peeking around the corner" or "I'm continuing down the hall."

Ok.  So it all depends on exactly *how* the player announces his or
her actions.  "Peeking around the corner" (or something worded to that
effect) should also have an AP cost associated with it to represent
that the character is pausing or approaching a situation with caution
(much like the 8 AP jump 2m+ action).  Call it "Making a Perception
Test" or something like that.

> >***need new AP action cost for "ready weapon"***
> 
> If you mean drawing from a scabbard or holster, yes.  But any weapon held
> is considered ready. that's what the Intiative test is about, and part of
> the reason why Tactics is part of the AP total.  The more you know about
> combat, the better you'll be at keeping a weapon readied by always tracking
> with the muzzle, or knowing how to hold the sword in a ready stance.

Roleplayers have a tendency, however, to *always* run around with
their weapons ready.  A good referee must remember this and penalize
them when they try to quickly open a door or pick up something (I saw
it in our old gaming group all the time).

> >I still believe that all these reactive initiative tests could get out
> >of hand:
> >
> >"A" beats "B" on an initiative test and moves first down a corridor...
> >comes across "C" hiding in an alcove... another test is made... "A"
> >wins and decides to keep going... comes across mutually hostile "D",
> >"E", and "F" at a T-junction... "A" beats "D" and "E" but not "F", who
> >proceeds to shoot "A"... "A" then completes his move... now it is
> >"B's" turn... runs past "C" and into "D", "E", and "F"... more
> >initiative tests are made... "B" barely survives, but not before "A"
> >tries to take a shot at him with his remaining APs, another initiative
> >test is made... etc, etc.
> 
> In can get confusing.  But rember, in each of those cases, once everybody
> who can get involved, is involved, *all* the actions happen and are
> resolved, before "A" can continue his move.  Also, in that scenario, people
> are going to be running short on AP real fast.  If D, E, and F are all
> hostile, they'll probably be busy going for cover and shooting each other
> when B comes down the hall.  (If he even decides to after hearing the
> gunfire.)

Actually, I meant that "D", "E", and "F" were a group of individuals
indifferently hostile to "A", "B", and "C", not to each other.  But
that's ok.

One more thing that I would recommend is a small sentence telling
referees to playtest this system with their players *first* before
using it for real.  Mention how conserving APs isn't immediately on
every players mind and what the potential consequences might be if
they spend their APs to freely (perhaps include such an unfortunate
individual as one of the characters in your planned start-to-finish
combat example).

> Here's how I see it:
> 
> A and B roll for initiative.  A wins, declares he'll move
> A moves past C.  Intiative task, A wins (idea: spending AP on an inititive
> task has the same effect as ending an action.. in this case, if A had spent
> AP to react to C, B would be able to make his action before either C or A.)
> A continues moving, meets D,E,, & F, wins two of the three inits (good
> dice!), F shoots A.

!?!  Slow down a little and try that again :)

> At this point, A has moved several meters, taken part in three Intiative
> tasks, and been shot.  Odds are, he's pretty low on AP. (Idea: being
> wounded has the same affect as finishing an action.)

Kind of like the old CT rule that all damage for the first attack is
applied to only one stat.  I'd say that if someone suffered X amount
of damage (or had suffered damage that turn that reduced one stat to
zero), either all remaining APs would be considered forfeit or that
person's remaining APs would be halved.

It will take a bit of playtesting but losing all of one's remaining
APs might lead to a situation where a character with a lower
initiative rating could conceivably deny his opponent of acting,
merely by injuring him at the beginning of each combat turn.  Hmmm...

> A then finishes his move.  B may now take his (long delayed) move. After
> his encounter with the three amigos, you have A taking a shot at him.  You
> forgot C, who is till skulking in his alcove.  A cannot move until all the
> actions from his prior intiative tasks are resolved.  So now A has B, C,
> and at least F gunning for him.  I'd run like hell.
> 
> After C has moved, and resolved any conflicts, then D (if he has any AP
> left at this moment), E, then F.  Then, and only then can A spend any
> remaining AP.

Perhaps the final draft will require to combat examples.  A simple one
and the one we just acted out :)

> Which seems to be about right.. I'll look at tit next Wednsday.

I've got a few more things to add to v2.1 but I will send that to you
personally later tonight or tomorrow morning.

James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1774
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Tuesday, September 2 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1775



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Sea Bears
Re: Universal Range Bands
Re: Universal Range Bands
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1764
Re: Task Resolution
[none]
Re: Sea Bears
Vehicles Page Updated
FF&S 2 Conversions
Re: Near-C missiles?
Antitank Helicopter (TL7)
Re: CSC TL3 steam wagon
Re: Keanou
RE: K'Kows and the Hresh
RE: Sea Bears
Re: Sea Bears
Re: CSC Panzer Hovercraft
Re: B5 Release Dates
Re: Conspiracy theory
Battle dress turtles  (was RE: Traveller-digest V1997 #1764)
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1770

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 02 Sep 1997 01:08:51 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: Sea Bears

On Mon, 01 Sep 1997 14:43:34 -0700, Douglas E. Berry wrote:

> I have a friend
> who raises chiuhuas (sp?) the most useless bundles of protein ever
> assembled on Earth, but she loves the little walking menaces...

ROTFLMAO!




James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 16:41:08 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Universal Range Bands

In mail you write:

> On Sun, 31 Aug 1997 13:10:04 PST, Leonard Erickson wrote:
>
>> The "nice" thing about near c missiles is that they can't manuever
>> worth shit. So anything that gets any warning can dodge them. They are
>> only useful against immobile targets (at least until we get drives that
>> can do multiple thousands of gees).
>> 
>> BTW, I'd not be at all surprised to find that you could build a near c
>> missile using an ion drive, even though the accel would only be 1/100th
>> g. 
>
> The trick would involve positioning the missile and beginning to
> accelerate it during the *Third* Frontier War so that it reaches its
> target by the time the *Fifth* Frontier War stats (assuming the target
> didn't change hands during the *Fourth* Frontier War).

It only takes 354 days to get to 1% of c at 1/100th of a g.

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 16:29:33 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Universal Range Bands

In mail you write:

> At 01:10 PM 8/31/97 PST, Leonard Erickson wrote:
>>
>>The "nice" thing about near c missiles is that they can't manuever
>>worth shit. So anything that gets any warning can dodge them. They are
>>only useful against immobile targets (at least until we get drives that
>>can do multiple thousands of gees).
>
> Hmm following this anology would mean current day fighters can never get
> hit by current missiles because the fighter can all ways get out of the
> way. NOT!

Inappropriate analogy. The missiles never get to a velocity that
greatly exceeds their acceleration capability.

Consider that a a near c missile with a 1 g T-plate drive can reach 1%
of c after 3.5 days of acceleration. At that point, it is going
"forward" 3,000,000 meters every second, but the T-Plate can only
deflect the end point of that vector by *10* meters. That gives a
"turn" ratio of 300,000 to 1. arctan(1/300,000) = .68 *seconds* of arc.

It's not hard to avoid something with *that* sort of turning capability.

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 16:59:52 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1764

In mail you write:

> At 01:14 PM 8/31/97 PST, you wrote:
>>In mail you write:
>
>>>   Trauma plates are meant to stop handgun rounds. *I* wouldn't like to
>>> rely on them to stop a .303 deer round - even if it _is_ a hollowpoint!
>>>
>>>   Most rifle rounds go right through sheet steel of significant
>>> thicknesses.
>>
>>I know. But I was thinking of *military* type body armor. They use some
>>sort of ceramic laminate in the trauma plates. After all, they *do*
>>have to worry about not only rifle bullets, but shrapnel.
>
> Shrapnel is stopped by the most bsic armor, it really isn't what the trauma
> plate is for.  The trauma plate inserts for an Army issue PASGT vest will
> stop a 7.62mmS round fired from 100m, but adds weight and decreses
> flexibility.
>
> The whole issue of armoring infantry needs to be looked at from the
> perspective of what kills the infantry.  It's not rifle fire, but shrapnel
> from artillery and mortars, so most paersonal armor is designed just to
> stop those low-velocity, aerodynamicly unsound little murderers.

Well, tankers look at things differently. A lot of them are willing to
give up the flexibility for the protection at least when they have to
get out of the tank in hostile territory. :-)

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 02 Sep 1997 01:07:00 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

On Sun, 31 Aug 1997 01:55:56 -0700, David P. Summers wrote:

[snip]

> >But didn't you ask during one of your previous posts how this
> >discussion on alternate task systems came into being?
> 
> No I didn't.  I would suggest you keep people straigt before
> you decide to start deciding who should be call names and who
> is taking things too personally.

Follow your own advice then.  The individual that you have been
trading email back and forth with for the past week is not "Kevin",
but "Kenneth".  The fact that you don't even know the name of the
individual you are at words with is ridiculous.

[snip]

> >>Any discussion of flaws was immediately counted
> >> by you as support.
> >
> >This only makes sense.  Perceived "flaws" in the current system were
> >naturally "support" for changes.
> 
> Yes.  For _some_ change.  Not for _your_ change.

This is irrelevant.

A number of TMLers agreed that the "stat + skill" issue was flawed--
the flaw being that they did not agree that stats should have as much
impact on skill as they currently do in T4.0.  This created a need for
a solution, and KBv2.0 was but one of the solutions put forward.  Ken
has repeatedly stated that he would be happy if such a change took
place, whether or not it borrowed from his own task system.  I, too,
believe that the current system is flawed-- Ken just believes in that
fact a bit more than the rest of us do.

> >>Mr. Bearden may be "uniquely passionate" about the future of
> >Traveller, but at least he is making his voice heard.
> 
> Which is what I'm doing.
> 
> >You, OTOH, seem to have a personal grudge against him.  Ever since Ken
> >resumed posting to the list a week or so ago, you have followed up
> >nearly all of his postings with one of your own aimed at belittling
> >him.
> 
> Hog wash.  I posted one message the fact that there is significant
> disgreement with stat over skill and done nothing but reply to
> message where he call me a "butt" and "wrong again" and such.

I believe there was much more to your posting that resulted in Ken's
"butt" response than you care to admit.  He didn't only ask "Why must
you be such a butt" but many other questions regarding other comments
you made as well.  Obviously, you touched a nerve.

> >That type of behaviour belongs in private mail, not here so
> >everyone can watch you two exchange personal attacks.
> 
> Then one might wonder why you posted your message to the list...

LOL!  I posted to the list in order to support some of Ken's valid
points, clear up a few misconceptions, and make a few of my own, not
to belittle you!

This, too, will be my final post on the subject, since I thought it
was necessary to defend myself.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 2 Sep 1997 11:37:47 +1000 (EST)
From: David Jaques-Watson <davidjw@pcug.org.au>
Subject: [none]

Dear Folks -

1. DIANA

To tie this to Traveller, the shock that I felt when I heard this awful news
is similar (but much worse) than what I felt when I heard that Strephon was
assassinated. No, really!! In Oz, it was announced at a con (Cancon or
Sydcon, can't remember), and I went around in a daze for the next day,
trying to work out all the implications. (It's taken three days, so far, to
comes to terms with Diana's death). That is the sort of impact that
Traveller, a well-written piece of fiction, can have on long-term readers.

....oh, and I agree that, out of respect, we should quieten down the
conspiracy theories, OK?

2. SECOND SURVEY

The zipped data, originally on the Sunbane site, can be found here:
        http://www.itlabs.umn.edu/~bonnevil/traveller/sector-uwp.tar.gz

BTW, this link (and hopefully EVERY other Trav link) is available from my
web page. If your site doesn't appear here, please email me!

3. PLAGUE OF DUSKIR - again??

I thought this had been done to death before??

Anyway, I have no problem with the idea. It's like in Oz with foot-and-mouth
disease, or the recent revival of whooping cough. We have never had
foot-and-mouth in this country, which is why our quarantine regs are so
strict. People are terrified of what might happen with a breakout! No
immunity means that it could spread like wildfire, and bang goes some of our
major primary industries. Again, with whooping cough, we thought that it had
been virtually eradicated through immunisation. However, this led people to
the (mistaken) idea that they did not have to immunise their kids. Guess
what? Whooping cough is coming back with a vengance. Older kids who should
have been immunised against it are giving it to younger kids who are too
young to be immunised yet.

No, I can quite believe in the Plague of Duskir. The Vilani, who partially
adapted to the virtually incompatable environment on their planet, encounter
the Terrans with their very compatable diseases. Can you say, "Tasmanian
Aboriginies"?

4. KEANOU

Perhaps an ice world with an elliptical orbit, and now it is in the process
of heating up? Or should that be a mantle of continouous cloud cover that is
finally precipitating??

5. SEA BEARS

Rather than an anagathic component, how about a psi drug component? Now
_that_ will shock the Imperials if they find out about it!
________________________________________________________________________
Hyphen (David Jaques-Watson)                         davidjw@pcug.org.au
http://www.tip.net.au/~davidjw
"I file things in historical order, with a hashing algorithm of gravity"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 01 Sep 97 20:51:28 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: Sea Bears

On 09/01/97 at 05:02 PM,  Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk> said:

>Now, the problem I need help with is this: Why did the Zhodani decide to
>spread the Sea Bears to all these worlds? I've already decided that they
>must be domesticatable and that they could propably be as useful as dog on
>land and (non-sapient) dolphins in the water, but is that enough to
>explain it? Or could there be some other reason? I've thought about giving
>one of their organs anagathic properties, but that is something that I
>also think has been overused. Does any of you have any ideas?

Low-grade psi companion?  Perhaps, most Sea Bears aren't psi capable, but 1
in a few thousand has a little potential..not as telepaths, maybe just as
emotipaths.

This would make them desirable pets/companions for the Zhodani.  Perhaps
they seeded all those planets with them so larger numbers of "companions"
could develop and be waiting for the arrival of the colonists.

The Imperials, with their lack of interest in psychic abilities, have
little or no suspicion that the Sea Bears are *anything* but non-sapient
animals.

Eris
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: 02 Sep 1997 02:38:53 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Vehicles Page Updated

I've added some vehicles to the DMCI vehicles page:

http://www.interlog.com/~dmci104/GamingClub/Traveller/vehicles.html


They are all T4 vehicles, designed using CSC, but I tried to hold them to
close-to-real-world parameters.  You can use them with TNE as long as you
aren't concerned about game statistics.  (Eg. the TL4 steam shovel defines
dirt moved in cubic metres, coal burned in kg/hour, and so forth.)

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 2 Sep 1997 01:56:41 -0400 (EDT)
From: LrdRhys01@aol.com
Subject: FF&S 2 Conversions

I have FFS2 and I'm starting to use it. But, I don't seem to be able to
locate any conversion tables etc.. to convert the Armor Factors into Starship
USP form. The USP chart in back of Starships doesn't result in armor ratings
anywhere close to the example ships. Am I missing the obvious or what? Any
help would be appreciated and seriously praised to all concerned. 

Email at lrdrhys01@aol.com

T. L. Rice

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 23:03:22 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Near-C missiles?

In mail you write:

> No, but they could use Lorentz force steering.  The higher the velocity
> the higher the deflection force in a mag field.

But the only available magnetic field is the one "embedded" in the
solar wind. And that varies *greatly* in magnitude and direction. Also,
attempting to use it for steering is more likely to result in
deflection of the solar wind particles as they mass less.

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: 02 Sep 1997 02:36:11 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Antitank Helicopter (TL7)

Antitank Helicopter (TL7)
Designed by Robert Prior

Summary:
     0.85 displacement ton box streamlined;  9.06 tonnes;  kCr 702
Chassis:
     11.9 kL box streamlined (3.5 m long x 1.8 m wide x 1.8 m high); 
Structure: 352 kg of light composite, rated for 1.0Gs, body 0.30 cm thick, 4
armour rating;  Stealth Structure: -3DM against TL7- military and TL8-
civilian sensors
     
Performance:
     2.01 MW TL7 Turbine, Gas power plant;  Fuel: 1.81 kL of high-grade hcarb
(1.81 tonnes), 6 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 2.00 MW helicopter with silencer;  Maximum Speed: 358
km/h;  Range: 2145 km;  Agility: +3DM
Crew:
     Crew roster: pilot, sensor operator;  2 crew stations (4.0 cm of Light
Composite armour, rating 9)
Armament:
     Weapon                          Damage    Range          Shots   
Reloads   Notes
     Missle, Heavy AT-7              30 (20 expShort          1       3      
  +3DM, remotehardpoint
     Missle, Heavy AT-7              30 (20 expShort          1       3      
  +3DM, remotehardpoint
     Autocannon, Light-6             10        Long           100     5      
  +3DM, coaxial
Communications:
     Subcontinental Radio (10.00 kW, TL7, SmVcl, MilSpec)
Sensors:
     Active Regional Radar (1.00 kW, MilSpec, DispArray)  Resolution: 10 cm
per km of range
     Active Subregional Lidar (100 W, MilSpec, DispArray)  Resolution: 2.0 cm
per km of range
Other:
     614 L of cargo space


Designed with CSC (software (c) Robert Prior, 1997)

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 23:05:36 -0800
From: Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca>
Subject: Re: CSC TL3 steam wagon

>	Here's a little something inspired by the Machine People's steam
>wagons from the Ringworld novels...  At the risk of sounding completely
>insane, another shortcoming of the VDS is that it doesn't allow for alcohol
>fuel for early TL steam engines :).

IIRC, the Machine People in the novels had ground cars and slug-throwers.
According to the Ringworld RPG, which was authorized by Niven,  they have
advanced "nearly as far as mid-20th-century Earth". I would put them at TL
5.

As an aside, I was always disappointed the Ringworld RPG never took off. It
was an extremely high-quality game with loads of background information in
one of the most popular science fiction settings. I have never seen an IG
product that matches it in quality. As Niven would say, TANJ.

Oh, as for alcohol fuel; FF&S1 uses the same rules as Hydrocarbon
Distillates (eg. gasoline) with a power output multiplier of 0.75

- --
Richard Hough
rdhough@orca.bc.ca

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 23:13:35 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Keanou

In mail you write:

> The planet Keanou (Spinward Marches 2411) is a problem to me. In _Spinward
> Marches_, _Twilight's Peak_, and _The Traveller Adventure_ its hydrographics
> score is 0, indicating that around 1105 it had a maximum of 4% free-standing
> water. But in _Spinward Marches Campaign_ and the _Regency Sourcebook_ it
> has a hydrographics score of 2, indicating that in 1110 (and 1202) it had a
> minimum of 15% free-standing water.
>
> Can anybody suggests how a planet can go from 4 to 15% open water in 5 years
> or less?

It's orbiting a *very* hot star, with a high eccenticity orbit. Surface
temp is near boiling, and what you are seeing are the "seasonal"
variations. In other words, at periastron it has 0, at apoastron it has
15%. :-)

You don't want to get caught in a storm on this world!

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 2 Sep 1997 03:15:00 -0700
From: Eric Nolan <ericno@MICROSOFT.com>
Subject: RE: K'Kows and the Hresh

e)
"Plants are for eating.  Why is it that you carnivores have so much
trouble understanding the most obvious universal truths.  Animal does
not eat Animal.  That is atrocity.  Animal eats Plant.  Why should the
intelligence of the plant present an ethical dilemma?"

The K'kree always were weird.

Eric.

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca [SMTP:shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca]
> Sent:	Monday, September 01, 1997 8:28 PM
> To:	traveller@MPGN.COM
> Subject:	Re: K'Kows and the Hresh
> 
> Hello,
> >Now, part of the K'Kree superiority complex has been their herbivore
> >nature - they simply eat plants. So what would they think of sophont
> plants?
> >
> >Your opinions would be appreciated.
> 
>   Hmm. They could a) ignore them and the potential for ethical
> problems
> about eating plants :), b) pretend not to understand the question, c)
> treat them as an herbivorous species, which can lead to d), integrate
> them into their religious beliefs (JTAS #?) as being prime candidates
> for inheriting K'kree stewardship of the galaxy when the herd is done
> with it.
> 
>   Have fun.
>         Steven Hudson
>         

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 2 Sep 1997 03:10:13 -0700
From: Eric Nolan <ericno@MICROSOFT.com>
Subject: RE: Sea Bears

It's good to see you were being cautious not to fall into the trap of
using all the usual explanations for things.  Variety is the spice of
Traveller.

Perhaps the Sea Bears merely have the most indiscriminate digestion of
the wildlife the Zho's had available.  

"We have chosen Sea Bears to be the primary chordate with which we will
seed these planets because of their proven ability to adapt to new
environments.  Studies have shown that they can change from pack hunters
who can bring down prey much larger than themselves, to lone hunters and
even to carrion eaters and scavengers.  They also have the ability to
hibernate through particulary adverse conditions and can store up enough
subcutaneous fat to survive for months on small amounts of food.  In
addition to this they are also amphibians, fully functioning hunters on
either land or in the water.  This incredible flexibility makes their
survival chance, according to our projection figures published in
appendix 4, at least 120% greater than the next closest candidate the
mocklarian fungus rat."

Assuming that their adaptability is very high, then it is also safe to
assume that they can be easily adapted as pets/work animals.

Eric.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 23:20:28 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Sea Bears

In mail you write:

> As for the Sea Bears, maybe they just liked the things?  I have a friend
> who raises chiuhuas (sp?) the most useless bundles of protein ever
> assembled on Earth, but she loves the little walking menaces...

Hey! Chihuahuas aren't useless. In fact they are still perfectly usable
for thier original purpose. Food!

As I've said before, tastes in food differ *widely* among cultures on
Earth. In the Imperium they are going to vary even more widely. 

Picture your players, they've just saved the world or whatever, and the
grateful citizens throw a banquet for them. Out comes the main course...

How about translucent, iridescently colored worms? Maybe even *live*?
(think living, squirming gummy worms).

I leave other such things to your imagination, but suggest that you
check into such things as "birdsnest soup" (made from *real* bird
nests, said nests being made from the gelatinous saliva of the birds...)
Or the "moon worms" harvested from the sea on some Pacific Islands.

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 2 Sep 1997 07:37:29 +2
From: "RFXn" <mlaakso@utu.fi>
Subject: Re: CSC Panzer Hovercraft

On  1 Sep 97 at 11:47, Bill Hopper wrote:

> > From:          Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
> > Subject:       CSC Panzer Hovercraft
> > 	Dunno whether anyone here read _Hardwired_ by Walter Jon Williams.
> > If not, here's a TL-9 armoured and armed hovercraft used for cross-country
> > smuggling of low-volume high-value cargoes, or just shooting things and
> > breaking people, joyriding through parks and shopping malls, making the
> > National Guard earn their keep, parking wherever you want to, and generally
> > terrorizing your players.  The armour is enough to stop small arms up to
> > aircraft autocannon levels, it does 187 kph flat out, and packs a nastyish
> > turret-mounted weapons suite.
> 
> If you haven't read _Hardwired_, you should.
> WKH

	Even more so because Walter Jon Williams is a gamer himself, author
of R. Talsorian Games' Hardwired supplement, set in the same world. 
And he's got near-C rocks in it too! :)

/RFXn     mlaakso@utu.fi        aka. Matti Laakso
 -Phone: +358-(0)2-237 9928       YO-Kyla 19 A 11
 -IRC: RFXn                       FIN-20540  TURKU
 -Talk: RFXn@delenn.yok.utu.fi    Finland

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 21:54:54 -0600 (MDT)
From: "P. ENGEBOS" <pengebos@NMSU.Edu>
Subject: Re: B5 Release Dates

On 31 Aug 1997, Rob Prior wrote:
> So, does anyone know when anything other than the basic rulebook will be
> released???

The first sourcebook, THE Earthforce Sourcebook, is reportedly awaiting
final approvbable from Warner.  I'm on the Babproj mainling list and CEE
is supposed to let us know when it goes to the printers.

> This is actually semi-on-topic, because I like the B5 combat system (realistic
> wounding effects, according to my paramedic relatives) and I've heard that
> the starship combat is fast, fun, and feels Travellerish (whatever that
> means).

The starship rules in the Earthforce sourcebook are based on the Full
Thrust miniatures game by Ground Zero Games (Geohex in the USA_), and are
very fun and playable.  In fact, the Earthforce SOurcebbok rules are going
to appear more or less in the next Full Thrust book.

THere is a strictly miniatures based game, called Babylon Wars, being put
out by Agents of Gaming.  I've heard it described as a faster versoin of
Star Fleet Battles, but I don't know much about it, My FLGS hasn't got it
in yet.

Peter Engebos				<pengebos@nmsu.edu>
T'Sarith, Lord deGaalth			<tsarith@io.com>
		http://web.nmsu.edu/~pengebos/


> 
> 

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 02 Sep 1997 10:19:51 +0100
From: Bruce E J Lewis <bruce@legend.ftech.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Conspiracy theory

At 21:19 01/09/97 +0100, Simon Early wrote:
>Carry on with the conspiracy theories - they do not upset me.  To avoid 
>upsetting others, could all posters put thirty or so carriage returns 
>in at the start of their e-mail so that only the interested need page 
>down to read them.
>
	Well they do happen to upset me when it concerns someone like Diana.
Traveller is supposed to be a fun thing and I don't want it associated with
such an awful event.

	I made sure I attended the Games Convention on Sunday to play in a
Traveller tournament and then to demo Traveller to some people - which was
highly enjoyable - because I wanted to try and blot this terrible tragedy
from my mind. I succeeded in that quite well I like to think, and I DO NOT
want to come here and see that effort wasted.

>Thousands of people are killed on the roads every year, and each one of 
>them is a sad loss to those who loved them.
>
	True, but no one I know who has died has had their case discussed here.
Why then should Diana's???

	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..."
	Park Lane Stand - Block 44, Row 14, Seat 176

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 2 Sep 1997 00:09:56 -0500
From: David Reed <david@techrefuge.com>
Subject: Battle dress turtles  (was RE: Traveller-digest V1997 #1764)

On Monday, September 01, 1997 20:00, Leonard Erickson wrote:
> Well, tankers look at things differently. A lot of them are willing to
> give up the flexibility for the protection at least when they have to
> get out of the tank in hostile territory. :-)

That's just typical tanker-turtle mentality, though.  ;-)  Anyone up for a 
"battle dress culture" debate?  Heh.  Of course, that will in turn 
re-spark the "efficacy of battle dress" debate...  Which will prompt 
someone to nuke both with the "near-c rock" debate...  Have I been lurking 
on this list too long?  </ramble>

Seriously, though.  One thing I miss from Traveller is initiative 
penalties for encumbrence/armor...  Oh, we don't really have a codified 
initiative system; we have "choose your own initiative".  Hmmm.  Any 
chance T4.1 will address that, Marc?

Anyone have/had PCs with battle dress withdrawal?  Foex, s/he was a 
marine, spent lots of skill points to be the ultimate wearer of the turtle 
shell (Harold, were you the one with plastique on that poor guy's combat 
armor faceplate at GenCon '96?  Or was that another sadist? ;-), only to 
wind up on adventures that will never again lead to wearing the zoot suit? 
 Leaving the poor soul with a glorified vacc suit skill?  How do (or 
should) you mollify said player?

Anyone brave enough to give their PCs battle dress?  (TNE-ers don't count; 
that's not *really* Traveller. ;-)  [Please douse the flamers, folks, 
that's called h-u-m-o-r.  -ed.]

Back to the original quote...  If you're IN A TANK in hostile territory, 
what in the stars would coerce you to get OUT?
______________________________________________________________________

David Reed           | All wickedness is weakness: that plea therefore
                     | With God or Man will gain thee no remission.
david@techrefuge.com |                -John Milton, "Samson Agonistes"
______________________________________________________________________

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 02 Sep 1997 06:51:45 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1770

On Mon, 1 Sep 1997 06:09:03 -0400, you wrote:

>Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 10:34:14 +0100
>From: Timothy.Collinson@solent.ac.uk
>Subject: re: proof-reading
>
>Phil wrote:
>
>>thereafter. What has IG done? They seem to be incapable of doing =
anything
>>correctly -- look, for ghu's sake, *I* did a better job of layout and
>>proofreading in the two issues of "Dark Star" that I produced than they=
 =3D
>>have in just about any of the products they have produced to date. Now =
I
>>don't claim to be a graphics design expert or a DTP guru, but if *I* =
can do it,
>>what's wrong with them?
>
>Hear, hear!  Phil did well with Dark Star (when's the next?  My fiver's
>burning a hole in my pocket or do I gather from your frustration that =
there
>won't be any more?)

At the rate they are going, nope, I am so cheesed off with the whole =
thing that
I can't say there will be. Now, *when* they go bust (not <if> ... *when*)=
 for
failing to produce a decent product and losing all their (little) =
remaining
credibility, presumably the people who pick up the license next time may =
have a
clue -- in which case Dark Star may well resurface. Or it may resurface =
for
another SF game that is (possibly) in the works, but which I can't say =
anything
about at this stage.

>This is what is so frustrating with the IG books.
>
>I produce 20 (sometimes 24) pages of A5 (LBB size) magazine *monthly* and
>singlehandedly.  If there are 2 or three typos in the whole thing I'm
>irritated.  If there's a missing table I go into deep depression and
>self-mortification for the whole month.  (In five years of producing these
>things, I've maybe missed two tables and lost one article.)

Well, I won't claim that DS didn't have more than two-three typos -- but I've
never missed out a table! And, yes, proofreading *is* hard work -- and the
number of times I've had to reprint a supposedly "master" copy of the final
pre-photocopy proof is large ... but you *can* get the errors down to the
minimum, and should do better than I if you are a "major" commercial concern.

Phil
- ---------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU)
Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)
Designer, Standard Role Playing (PGD)

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1775
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Tuesday, September 2 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1776



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Keanou (long)
Re: Universal Range Bands
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1771

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 02 Sep 1997 01:07:41 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@Alaska.NET>
Subject: Re: Keanou (long)

Hans Rancke-Madsen wrote

> The planet Keanou (Spinward Marches 2411) is a problem to me. In _Spinward
> Marches_, _Twilight's Peak_, and _The Traveller Adventure_ its hydrographics
> score is 0, indicating that around 1105 it had a maximum of 4% free-standing
> water. But in _Spinward Marches Campaign_ and the _Regency Sourcebook_ it
> has a hydrographics score of 2, indicating that in 1110 (and 1202) it had a
> minimum of 15% free-standing water.
> 
> Can anybody suggests how a planet can go from 4 to 15% open water in 5 years
> or less?

It is probably a typo that was fixed.  In my (1st printing) copy of
Spinward Marches it is listed as having a 0 hydrographics but is
represented on the map by a solid dot (indicating water) rather than an
empty circle (indicating a desert).  That notwithstanding here is an
explanation.

Keanou        2411 C792348-7  S Lo Ni              213 Im M3 III M2 D

"Visit Keanou - Planet of the Boiling Sea !

Nature lovers come visit one of the most interesting natural wonders you
have ever seen, the Boiling Sea on Keanou.  Keanou is tidally locked to
its far distant primary the mighty M3 III giant star known (locally) as
Fire.  Keanou is so far from Fire that even on the "light side" of the
planet which always faces Blaze the base temperature is below the
freezing point of water.  As you move farther into the hot face Keanou
gets warmer and warmer first reaching the melting point of water,
riseing further, passing the boiling point of water, and continuing to
increase to a maximum of over 800 degrees.  The low altitude flight over
the boiling sea (in comfortable imported state of the art luxury grav
aerial viewing craft) starts off at scenic Keanou City located in the
narrow temperate part of the hot face.  It swings south to the south
coast of the boiling sea where we see the vast Southwall Glacier which
is formed when hot steam from the north edge of the sea condenses,
freezes, piles into a glacier, and then melts off into the shallow
Boiling Sea.  We will then fly over the Boiling Sea stopping to point
out the many fascinating examples of Keanou's native life existing in
the always changing Boiling Sea.  After serving a luxurios and tasty
lunch your tour grav will then arrive at the north edge of the Boiling
Sea where you can watch the Sea literally boil away.  Viewing is done
with the aid of the fabulous high tech display windows in your grav
which employ sophisticated imaging technology to insure _you_ the best
view.  You do not need to worry about comfort or safety in these state
of the art grav which protect you from the vast atmpspheric turbulance
this constant boiling and freezing causes." - excerpt from the
introductory text of a vid ad produced for the Keanou External Council
by the ad agency of Imissarguur & Khalsa of Macene Belt

The Boiling Sea, a nature lovers delight, is made even more fascinating
by the fact that it is constantly changing in size throughout the course
of the planets 257 year eccentric orbit around the its primary. When
Keanou is farthest from the sun (as it was less than 10 years ago) the
sea covers only about 3% of the surface of the planet as most of the
water piles up into the then hundreds of meters tall Southwall Glacier. 
As Keanou moves closer to Blaze the Glacier melts and the water pours
forth into the wide and shallow basin that is the Boiling Sea. 

Keanou World Builders Handbook Data

Keanou        2411 C792348-7  S Lo Ni              213 Im M3 III M2 D

Size Related
Diameter: 10,852km	Density: 0.90MC	Gravity: 0.767 G
Primary Mass: 6.939	Orbit:10	Orbital Period: 257 years, 182 days
Rotation Period: tidal lock	Orbital Eccentricity: 0.200
Seismic Stress: 2	

Atmosphere Related
Atmospheric Composition: standard oxygen/nitrogen tainted with allergens
Surface Pressure: 1.80 atmospere
Stellar Luminosity: 5.903	Orbit Factor: 42.569	
Energy Absorbtion: 0.789	Greenhouse Effect: 1.15
Base Temperature -45.0	Orbital Eccentricity +/- 6.0	
Daytime Plus: +864.3	Nightime Minus: -22.8
Native Life: Yes	No Terraforming of any sort performed

Hydrographic Related
Hydrgographic Percentage:	circa 001-1100 2.5%
				circa 001-1102 2.9.%
				circa 001-1104 3.4%
				circa 001-1106 4.9%
				circa 001-1108 10.1%
				circa 001-1110 17.1%
				circa 001-1112 19.4 % (projected)
				circa 001-1118 20.2 % (projected max)
1 Major Sea - the Boiling Sea, 1 minor sea, 7 small seas, 11 scattered
lakes & glaciers
No Weather Control
Natural Resources: Agricltural, Crystals
Processed Resources: Agroproducts
Manufactured Goods: None
Information: Recordings (of the scenery), Documents

Population Related
Total Population: 2,277
Cities: Keanou City 2,006 Starport C
no other cities

Local Customs:  Unusual clothes for all, Divorce & remarriage required
for all, drinking/drugs prohibited for all

Social Outlook
Progressiveness: Progressive Attitude, Enterprising Action
Aggressiveness: Unagressive Attitude, Militant Action
Extensiveness: Harmonious Attitude, Xenophilic Action

Government Related
Government: Representative Democracy
Representative Agency: Executive Ruler (the Governor)
Other Authority: Legislative Several Councils (the External Council, the
Environmental Council, and the Internal Council)
Other Authority: Judicial Elite Council (judicial tribunal)

Law Related
Uniformity of Law: personal
Overall			8
Weapons			8
Trade			5
Criminal Law		9
Civil Law		8
Personal Freedom	B

Technology Related
Technology Profile
High Common		7
Low Common		7
Energy			7
Computers/Robotics	8
Communications		8
Medical			8
Environmental		8
Land Transport		7
Water Transport		8
Air Transport		8
Space Transport		8
Heavy Military		7
Personal Military	7
Novelty			E

Keanou/Spinward Marches 2411 is an unremarkable low population world in
the Spinward Marches.  It is located in the Lanth Subsector on the
Kinord spur of the Spinward Main and does not receive much traffic in
its own right although all jump 1 traffic bound for Inthe must pass
through Keanou. Keanou has never had a high population, presumably due
to its relative paucity of resoureces.  Keanou's people are friendly and
hard working and the world experiences little conflict.  Keanou's laws
are slightly stricter than the Imperial average particularly in the area
of personal freedom which is severely constrained by their laws. 
Keanous people are required to wear uniform clothing in the interests of
production efficency although offworlders are easily recognized by their
exemption from this law.  The people of Keanou are concerned about the
possibilty of inbreeding which is always a danger among low populations
at tech levels which do not allow for genetic detection & correction of
problems.  In order to avoid this problem no marriage on Keanou may last
more than 4 standard years and any couple who have had a chold may not
have another with each other.  The people of Keanou are interested in
getting offworld DNA into their genepool and this accounts for the
remarkable degree of personal frendliness its inhabitants show towards
visitors (I can't be more explicit without getting an R rating here...)
The people of Keanou are fun loving but are fundamentally opposed to any
form of mind altering substance as they believe that such items alter
the sanctity of the individual mind.

Further detail on the Boiling Sea:

The Sea is shaped like so

	--------------------------
	\			/
	  \                   /
	    \               /
	      \           /
		\	/
		   \  /
		     V	 	  	 	

with the glaciers piled high at the southern V of the Sea.  As Keanou
approaches the closest point to the sun the glacier gradually warms from
just under freezing to just above freezing and the entire glacier melts
off in less than 15 years the water then spreads north across the
shallow basin of the sea.  As it reaches the north of the sea it
gradually reaches the boiling point, boils off, and rises into the
atmosphere.  Convection current take it south and it refreezes.  As the
planet retreats from the sun less of the glacier melts off and the sea
gradually rolls north and boils off.  As the climate cools and fewer
iceburgs fall off the glacier the sea gradually grows shallower and
shallower until most of it evaporates or bolis off leaving the Southwall
glacier as the planets primary source of water.  A similar process
occurs in the other, smaller, sea on the other side of the planet.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 23:08:57 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Universal Range Bands

In mail you write:

>>  If folks can handle SYLK files, I'll post the spreadsheet.
> Yes! Please post it.

Ok, here goes. Note that the figures are in days (that's why the
formulas have /86400 in them). To get hours, change to 3600. To get
minutes, change to 60. I *should* have made it a constant, but I didn't
think of it in time.

ID;PMP
P;PDefault
P;P@[cont]
P;P0E+00
P;P0.00
P;PGeneral
P;P0
P;P"$"#,##0.00;;\("$"#,##0.00\)
P;PBAR;;\(BAR\)
P;P0%
P;PIgnored
P;P#,##0
P;P#,##0.00
P;P"$"#,##0;;\("$"#,##0\)
P;P0.00%
P;P0.00E+00
P;Pm\/d\/yy
P;Pm\/d
P;Pd\-mmm\-yy
P;Pd\-mmm
P;Pmmm\-yy
P;Ph\:mm\ AM/PM
P;Ph\:mm\:ss\ AM/PM
P;Ph\:mm
P;Ph\:mm\:ss
P;Pm\/d\/yy\ h\:mm
P;P0.0
F;P4;DG0G10
F;W7 14 15
B;Y14;X14
C;Y1;X1;K"range"
F;P0;FD0C
C;X2;K"parsec"
F;P0;FD0C
C;X3;K"light year"
F;P0;FD0C
C;X4;K"AU"
F;P0;FD0C
C;X5;K"km"
F;P0;FD0C
C;X6;K"meters"
F;P0;FD0C
C;X7;K1
C;X8;K2
C;X9;K3
C;X10;K4
C;X11;K5
C;X12;K6
C;X13;K10
C;X14;K20
C;Y2;X1;K"E"
F;P0;FD0C
C;X5;K500
C;X6;ERC[-1]*1000;K500000
C;X7;E(2*SQRT(RC[-1]/(R1C7*9.8)))/86400;K0.00522863369736835
C;X8;E(2*SQRT(RC[-2]/(R1C8*9.8)))/86400;K0.00369720234374965
C;X9;E(2*SQRT(RC[-3]/(R1C9*9.8)))/86400;K0.00301875307266957
C;X10;E(2*SQRT(RC[-4]/(R1C10*9.8)))/86400;K0.00261431684868418
C;X11;E(2*SQRT(RC[-5]/(R1C11*9.8)))/86400;K0.00233831607535234
C;X12;E(2*SQRT(RC[-6]/(R1C12*9.8)))/86400;K0.00213458076841238
C;X13;E(2*SQRT(RC[-7]/(R1C13*9.8)))/86400;K0.00165343915343915
C;X14;E(2*SQRT(RC[-8]/(R1C14*9.8)))/86400;K0.00116915803767617
C;Y3;X1;K"F"
F;P0;FD0C
C;X5;K5000
C;X6;ERC[-1]*1000;K5000000
C;X7;E(2*SQRT(RC[-1]/(R1C7*9.8)))/86400;K0.0165343915343915
C;X8;E(2*SQRT(RC[-2]/(R1C8*9.8)))/86400;K0.0116915803767617
C;X9;E(2*SQRT(RC[-3]/(R1C9*9.8)))/86400;K0.00954613540326762
C;X10;E(2*SQRT(RC[-4]/(R1C10*9.8)))/86400;K0.00826719576719577
C;X11;E(2*SQRT(RC[-5]/(R1C11*9.8)))/86400;K0.0073944046874993
C;X12;E(2*SQRT(RC[-6]/(R1C12*9.8)))/86400;K0.00675013707777551
C;X13;E(2*SQRT(RC[-7]/(R1C13*9.8)))/86400;K0.00522863369736835
C;X14;E(2*SQRT(RC[-8]/(R1C14*9.8)))/86400;K0.00369720234374965
C;Y4;X1;K"G"
F;P0;FD0C
C;X5;K50000
C;X6;ERC[-1]*1000;K50000000
C;X7;E(2*SQRT(RC[-1]/(R1C7*9.8)))/86400;K0.0522863369736835
C;X8;E(2*SQRT(RC[-2]/(R1C8*9.8)))/86400;K0.0369720234374965
C;X9;E(2*SQRT(RC[-3]/(R1C9*9.8)))/86400;K0.0301875307266957
C;X10;E(2*SQRT(RC[-4]/(R1C10*9.8)))/86400;K0.0261431684868418
C;X11;E(2*SQRT(RC[-5]/(R1C11*9.8)))/86400;K0.0233831607535234
C;X12;E(2*SQRT(RC[-6]/(R1C12*9.8)))/86400;K0.0213458076841238
C;X13;E(2*SQRT(RC[-7]/(R1C13*9.8)))/86400;K0.0165343915343915
C;X14;E(2*SQRT(RC[-8]/(R1C14*9.8)))/86400;K0.0116915803767617
C;Y5;X1;K"H"
F;P0;FD0C
C;X5;K500000
C;X6;ERC[-1]*1000;K500000000
C;X7;E(2*SQRT(RC[-1]/(R1C7*9.8)))/86400;K0.165343915343915
C;X8;E(2*SQRT(RC[-2]/(R1C8*9.8)))/86400;K0.116915803767617
C;X9;E(2*SQRT(RC[-3]/(R1C9*9.8)))/86400;K0.0954613540326762
C;X10;E(2*SQRT(RC[-4]/(R1C10*9.8)))/86400;K0.0826719576719577
C;X11;E(2*SQRT(RC[-5]/(R1C11*9.8)))/86400;K0.073944046874993
C;X12;E(2*SQRT(RC[-6]/(R1C12*9.8)))/86400;K0.0675013707777551
C;X13;E(2*SQRT(RC[-7]/(R1C13*9.8)))/86400;K0.0522863369736835
C;X14;E(2*SQRT(RC[-8]/(R1C14*9.8)))/86400;K0.0369720234374965
C;Y6;X1;K"I"
F;P0;FD0C
C;X5;K5000000
C;X6;ERC[-1]*1000;K5000000000
C;X7;E(2*SQRT(RC[-1]/(R1C7*9.8)))/86400;K0.522863369736835
C;X8;E(2*SQRT(RC[-2]/(R1C8*9.8)))/86400;K0.369720234374965
C;X9;E(2*SQRT(RC[-3]/(R1C9*9.8)))/86400;K0.301875307266957
C;X10;E(2*SQRT(RC[-4]/(R1C10*9.8)))/86400;K0.261431684868418
C;X11;E(2*SQRT(RC[-5]/(R1C11*9.8)))/86400;K0.233831607535234
C;X12;E(2*SQRT(RC[-6]/(R1C12*9.8)))/86400;K0.213458076841238
C;X13;E(2*SQRT(RC[-7]/(R1C13*9.8)))/86400;K0.165343915343915
C;X14;E(2*SQRT(RC[-8]/(R1C14*9.8)))/86400;K0.116915803767617
F;Y7;X1;P0;FD0C
C;X5;K50000000
C;X6;ERC[-1]*1000;K50000000000
C;X7;E(2*SQRT(RC[-1]/(R1C7*9.8)))/86400;K1.65343915343915
C;X8;E(2*SQRT(RC[-2]/(R1C8*9.8)))/86400;K1.16915803767617
C;X9;E(2*SQRT(RC[-3]/(R1C9*9.8)))/86400;K0.954613540326762
C;X10;E(2*SQRT(RC[-4]/(R1C10*9.8)))/86400;K0.826719576719577
C;X11;E(2*SQRT(RC[-5]/(R1C11*9.8)))/86400;K0.73944046874993
C;X12;E(2*SQRT(RC[-6]/(R1C12*9.8)))/86400;K0.675013707777551
C;X13;E(2*SQRT(RC[-7]/(R1C13*9.8)))/86400;K0.522863369736835
C;X14;E(2*SQRT(RC[-8]/(R1C14*9.8)))/86400;K0.369720234374965
C;Y8;X1;K"J"
F;P0;FD0C
C;X4;K1
C;X5;ERC[-1]*150000000;K150000000
C;X6;ERC[-1]*1000;K150000000000
C;X7;E(2*SQRT(RC[-1]/(R1C7*9.8)))/86400;K2.86384062098029
C;X8;E(2*SQRT(RC[-2]/(R1C8*9.8)))/86400;K2.02504112333265
C;X9;E(2*SQRT(RC[-3]/(R1C9*9.8)))/86400;K1.65343915343915
C;X10;E(2*SQRT(RC[-4]/(R1C10*9.8)))/86400;K1.43192031049014
C;X11;E(2*SQRT(RC[-5]/(R1C11*9.8)))/86400;K1.28074846104743
C;X12;E(2*SQRT(RC[-6]/(R1C12*9.8)))/86400;K1.16915803767617
C;X13;E(2*SQRT(RC[-7]/(R1C13*9.8)))/86400;K0.90562592180087
C;X14;E(2*SQRT(RC[-8]/(R1C14*9.8)))/86400;K0.640374230523713
C;Y9;X1;K"K"
F;P0;FD0C
C;X4;K10
C;X5;ERC[-1]*150000000;K1500000000
C;X6;ERC[-1]*1000;K1500000000000
C;X7;E(2*SQRT(RC[-1]/(R1C7*9.8)))/86400;K9.0562592180087
C;X8;E(2*SQRT(RC[-2]/(R1C8*9.8)))/86400;K6.40374230523713
C;X9;E(2*SQRT(RC[-3]/(R1C9*9.8)))/86400;K5.22863369736835
C;X10;E(2*SQRT(RC[-4]/(R1C10*9.8)))/86400;K4.52812960900435
C;X11;E(2*SQRT(RC[-5]/(R1C11*9.8)))/86400;K4.05008224666531
C;X12;E(2*SQRT(RC[-6]/(R1C12*9.8)))/86400;K3.69720234374965
C;X13;E(2*SQRT(RC[-7]/(R1C13*9.8)))/86400;K2.86384062098029
C;X14;E(2*SQRT(RC[-8]/(R1C14*9.8)))/86400;K2.02504112333265
C;Y10;X1;K"L"
F;P0;FD0C
C;X4;K100
C;X5;ERC[-1]*150000000;K15000000000
C;X6;ERC[-1]*1000;K15000000000000
C;X7;E(2*SQRT(RC[-1]/(R1C7*9.8)))/86400;K28.6384062098029
C;X8;E(2*SQRT(RC[-2]/(R1C8*9.8)))/86400;K20.2504112333265
C;X9;E(2*SQRT(RC[-3]/(R1C9*9.8)))/86400;K16.5343915343915
C;X10;E(2*SQRT(RC[-4]/(R1C10*9.8)))/86400;K14.3192031049014
C;X11;E(2*SQRT(RC[-5]/(R1C11*9.8)))/86400;K12.8074846104743
C;X12;E(2*SQRT(RC[-6]/(R1C12*9.8)))/86400;K11.6915803767617
C;X13;E(2*SQRT(RC[-7]/(R1C13*9.8)))/86400;K9.0562592180087
C;X14;E(2*SQRT(RC[-8]/(R1C14*9.8)))/86400;K6.40374230523713
C;Y11;X1;K"M"
F;P0;FD0C
C;X4;K1000
C;X5;ERC[-1]*150000000;K150000000000
C;X6;ERC[-1]*1000;K150000000000000
C;X7;E(2*SQRT(RC[-1]/(R1C7*9.8)))/86400;K90.562592180087
C;X8;E(2*SQRT(RC[-2]/(R1C8*9.8)))/86400;K64.0374230523713
C;X9;E(2*SQRT(RC[-3]/(R1C9*9.8)))/86400;K52.2863369736835
C;X10;E(2*SQRT(RC[-4]/(R1C10*9.8)))/86400;K45.2812960900435
C;X11;E(2*SQRT(RC[-5]/(R1C11*9.8)))/86400;K40.5008224666531
C;X12;E(2*SQRT(RC[-6]/(R1C12*9.8)))/86400;K36.9720234374965
C;X13;E(2*SQRT(RC[-7]/(R1C13*9.8)))/86400;K28.6384062098029
C;X14;E(2*SQRT(RC[-8]/(R1C14*9.8)))/86400;K20.2504112333265
F;Y12;X1;P0;FD0C
C;X4;K10000
C;X5;ERC[-1]*150000000;K1500000000000
C;X6;ERC[-1]*1000;K1500000000000000
C;X7;E(2*SQRT(RC[-1]/(R1C7*9.8)))/86400;K286.384062098029
C;X8;E(2*SQRT(RC[-2]/(R1C8*9.8)))/86400;K202.504112333265
C;X9;E(2*SQRT(RC[-3]/(R1C9*9.8)))/86400;K165.343915343915
C;X10;E(2*SQRT(RC[-4]/(R1C10*9.8)))/86400;K143.192031049014
C;X11;E(2*SQRT(RC[-5]/(R1C11*9.8)))/86400;K128.074846104743
C;X12;E(2*SQRT(RC[-6]/(R1C12*9.8)))/86400;K116.915803767617
C;X13;E(2*SQRT(RC[-7]/(R1C13*9.8)))/86400;K90.562592180087
C;X14;E(2*SQRT(RC[-8]/(R1C14*9.8)))/86400;K64.0374230523713
C;Y13;X1;K"N"
F;P0;FD0C
C;X3;K1
C;X4;ERC[+1]/150000000;K63113.904
C;X5;E365.2425*86400*300000;K9467085600000
C;X6;ERC[-1]*1000;K9467085600000000
C;X7;E(2*SQRT(RC[-1]/(R1C7*9.8)))/86400;K719.467809266981
C;X8;E(2*SQRT(RC[-2]/(R1C8*9.8)))/86400;K508.740566778112
C;X9;E(2*SQRT(RC[-3]/(R1C9*9.8)))/86400;K415.384933353562
C;X10;E(2*SQRT(RC[-4]/(R1C10*9.8)))/86400;K359.73390463349
C;X11;E(2*SQRT(RC[-5]/(R1C11*9.8)))/86400;K321.755785828764
C;X12;E(2*SQRT(RC[-6]/(R1C12*9.8)))/86400;K293.721503177026
C;X13;E(2*SQRT(RC[-7]/(R1C13*9.8)))/86400;K227.515698045526
C;X14;E(2*SQRT(RC[-8]/(R1C14*9.8)))/86400;K160.877892914382
C;Y14;X1;K"O"
F;P0;FD0C
C;X2;K1
C;X3;ERC[-1]*3.26;K3.26
C;X4;ER[-1]C*3.26;K205751.32704
C;X5;ERC[-1]*150000000;K30862699056000
C;X6;ERC[-1]*1000;K30862699056000000
C;X7;E(2*SQRT(RC[-1]/(R1C7*9.8)))/86400;K1299.03295075331
C;X8;E(2*SQRT(RC[-2]/(R1C8*9.8)))/86400;K918.555008462437
C;X9;E(2*SQRT(RC[-3]/(R1C9*9.8)))/86400;K749.997023803619
C;X10;E(2*SQRT(RC[-4]/(R1C10*9.8)))/86400;K649.516475376656
C;X11;E(2*SQRT(RC[-5]/(R1C11*9.8)))/86400;K580.945196579308
C;X12;E(2*SQRT(RC[-6]/(R1C12*9.8)))/86400;K530.327981401267
C;X13;E(2*SQRT(RC[-7]/(R1C13*9.8)))/86400;K410.790287998981
C;X14;E(2*SQRT(RC[-8]/(R1C14*9.8)))/86400;K290.472598289654
W;N1;A1 1;C7 1 7
E


- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 02 Sep 1997 13:31:18 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1771

On Mon, 1 Sep 1997 12:07:41 -0400, you wrote:

>From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
>Subject: Re: Plague of Duskir
>
>Phillip and Andrew, could you please keep your sentenses a bit shorter?
>It enhances readability immensely.

I'll try.

>Phillip McGregor writes:
>>>From: Andrew Moffatt-Vallance <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
>>>>From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
<snip>
>>>with nuclear and chemical weapons. Also I have not "revised" canon in =
any=20
>>>way. Canon is that the Vilani evolved amongst an incompatible =
ecosystem.
>>
>>Errm, this is news to me! I raised this issue some considerable time =
ago
>>and was howled down by the canon-heads (not necessarily you)=20
>
>Phillip, is 'canon-head' meant to be derogatory? It sounds a bit that way.

Yes, but in the *friendliest* possible way <grin>! And, yes, you equally well call
*me* an "anti-canon-head" -- feel fee!

>>Then there's all those other "minor" human races -- we can assume that
>>some at least had bugs that were benign to them but not too friendly to
>>the Vilani;=20
>
>Very true. But none of these would affect all, or even a sizable=20
>fraction of Vilani. Each would affect a tiny group of Vilani. One can=20
>assume that the Vilani space-oriented culture developed effective=20
>quarantine measures fairly quickly. Which would prevent the rest of the=20
>Vilani from encountering those diseases.

And this means that the effectiveness of any Biowar or Plague such as PoD would
be much reduced. And it also means that the Vilani would be aware that such a=20
thing was a problem and would know how to handle it.

>>and on some of the worlds (there was one that had many Terran species, a=20
>>Ancient Zoo, in effect) there would be other Terran organisms ... and since
>>animals are the source of many human pathogens originally, the Vilani would=20
>>have  encountered them before.=20
>
>All very true. But you cannot jump to the conclusion that the solution=20
>they came up with was to develop a deep understanding of biology or even
>the germ theory of disease. Another solution would be rigorous quarantine=20
>measures. And those would be absolutely no use against a horde of Terran
>immigrants.

But, as I said, the *Terrans* would have the deep knowledge of biology and
medical science ... and, unless we are going to accept that the Terrans either
didn't care *or* deliberately set out to "thin" the Vilani populace, they would have
found it very easy to deal with the likelihood of disease spreading. There's no
way that the implied huge die back caused by the PoD would have occurred
unless you are claiming that the Terrans allowed it *deliberately*. And there was
(as I said) no percentage in that.

>>Then there's the Zho -- and the Vargr ... who, after all, are Terran stock=20
>>and would have bugs that would be possibly nasty to the Vilani.
>
>The Zhos are no problem, of course, since contact with them was minimal =
and
>would be governed by age-old quarantine protocols. But the Vargr would =
be
>more of a problem, especially on those worlds that they shared. But =
again,
>the Vilani who survived sharing a world with Vargr could be those who
>survived by natural selection, and they would stay on that world and not
>pass on their immumity to the Vilani living in the other end of the Siru
>Zirka.=20

No, but it passes on the *idea* of diseases, and the *medical* (rather than just
quarantine) means of dealing with them. Which is (from my point of view) what
the whole argument is about!

And the longstanding existence of the AAB means that Biowar and PoD would
be quickly recognised for what they were and the AAB data could be used to jump
start medical research. Consider the benefits of computers here -- and the inevitable
need for veterinary medicine for local food animals where kept on a commercial basis.

>>>They must inevitably have had many such encounters, as I suggested.=20
>>>Since the diseases they encounter would be endemic (and occasionally
>>>epidemic) on worlds that they wish to rule, and since even quarantine
>>>is not really viable against a world that you have some wish to rule,=20
>>>then they would have no option but to develop methods for dealing with=
=20
>>>said diseases.
>
>You're right. But said methods does not _have_ to include vaccination.
>Doctors today deal with infectious patients for their whole life and =
don't
>catch anything from them. Something like the measures used by the =
Spacers
>described by Asimov in "The Caves of Steel" (minimum contact, sterile
>procedures, etc.). Hmm... interesting idea. No wonder the Vilani were =
not
>very popular with their subject races ;-). Using non-humans =
intermediators
>would also help. Perhaps that's why the Bwaps were so popular as =
mid-level
>functionaries.

No, they don't *have* to ... but they are not a high tech =
item/development as some
people may think. I'm simply indicating that the ability to deal with =
these sorts of
diseases does not require a huge understanding of how they work.

>>>Why not just quarantine? after all there's plenty of worlds out there.
>>>If there is intelligent life on the world, then they would likely be
>>>primative
>>=20
>>Indeed, why have an Interstellar Empire at all and effectively =
quarantine
>>*yourself*. Sort of counterproductive, though.
>
>There's all the empty planets colonized by Vilani to rule. Plus, as I =
said,
>ruling by proxy.

But we know that the Vilani *did* occupy lots of planets that were =
already inhabited.
We know that they *did* allow "subject" races to move around.
=20
>>>(the Vilani encountered very few technologically advanced races), so=20
>>>their level of biomedical theory is probably no better than the =
Vilani.=20
>>
>>But they will need to develop more sophisticated technologies and, =
unlike
>>the Vilani on Vland itself, *they* will have good reason to do so.=20
>
>But their measures would be less useful for the Vilani. You're =
forgetting=20
>Andrew's second suggestion about the effect of evolving on Vland: that =
the=20
>Vilani immune system was affected negatively by 290,000 years of =
isolation=20
>in an almost disease-free environment. The other minor races could have =
had=20
>their own disease vectors. Propably less than the Terrans  --  one might=
=20
>compare them to the meso-americans  --  but enough to keep their immune=20
>system at least partly on its toes.

And I argue that there would have been enough contacts with subject races=
 that
had diseases that they would have had a immune response amongst the more
adventurous elements of their society that went back at least to the =
founding of
the Ziru Sirka.

>>There is no way that you can have an empire like the Ziru Sirka and not
>>have some sort of policy for such situations, even if they happen=20
>>*relatively* rarely.
>
>But the situation had NEVER happened before. Never before had many =
thousand
>disease carriers been introduced to populated Vilani planets. At most =
some
>Vilani diplomats had been infected while living on another planet.

And, as I have pointed out, unless you are claiming the Terrans did this =
sort of
thing deliberately and neglected the Vilani and the potential public =
health problems
completely, this makes no sense.

The reason we are given for the Estigaribbia coup is that he and
the Terran Navy were concerned with the poor attitude (alleged) of the =
Terran
government towards the Vilani. Why do this if you want to kill off =
massive numbers
anyway?

>>And, as they advance in technical sophistication, they will develop
>>better understanding ... after all, the Germ theory of disease is a TL3=
=20
>>or 4 development, and vaccination is even earlier.
>
>But what if vaccination proves not to work on the Vilani? Remember,
>Andrew is postulating an impaired Vilani immume system.

And is there any evidence for this? After all, the Vilani are still =
around *despite*
the fact that Terran diseases are now (it is reasonable to assume) =
rampant throughout
"known space."

>What if we assume that due to an impaired immune system, most diseases =
are
>as lethal to Vilani? If that was the case, vaccination would not develop
>as a measure. The only possible measure, actually, would be quarantine =
and
>destruction of the host. OTOH, diseases would very rarely achieve =
epidemic
>proportions, because they would kill the infected people before they =
could
>pass it on.

Then what about the Vilani today? If they have developed an immunity in =
only a thousand
years or so when in the previous several thousand years of the ZS they =
developed none,
it seems more than likely that they should *still* be lethally affected =
by terran diseases --
*regardless* of any medical intervention.

>>And moving such large numbers of people means you are also moving the
>>medical knowledge and technology to prevent the diseases ever being a=20
>>problem. The Terrans are the source of serums, and their knowlege tells=
=20
>>them this -- few if any Vilani would have died *unless* you are =
claiming=20
>>that the Terrans had an official policy of allowing or encouraging such=
 a=20
>>die back?=20
>
>You are assuming that the standard Terran measures would work on the =
Vilani.
>Am I wrong or are most vaccines actually weakened diseases? You are =
still
>ignoring Andrew's very cogent point that the Vilani were less able to =
deal
>with diseases than the Terrans.

Yes. Many are in fact *dead* diseases that still stimulate an immune =
response.
Or, as I understand it, you can actually transfer the immune factors from=
 one
human to another (or will be able to with reasonably likely advances in =
medical
science). And, of course, *antibiotics* will handle all the bacteria =
caused
diseases and, we can assume, that there are *antivirals* available by the
time of the Terran Confed. So you don't *need* vaccines -- you simply =
need=20
a reasonably well prepared public health program ... *unless* you are =
arguing
that the Terrans ignored the certainty of disease problems to =
*deliberately*
kill off large numbers of Vilani?

>>This could hardly have been to their advantage -- and. after all, =
wasn't=20
>>the reason for Estigaribbia's coup *supposedly* because he and the =
terran=20
>>navy were concerned that the Vilani weren't going to be treated fairly?=
=20
>>And this was *before* any "millions" moved into the ZS.
>
>Actually, what Estigaribbia & Co. wanted may not have had much =
resemblance
>to what a load of Terran immigrants wanted. Given human history I would =
not
>consider it unlikely that on some planets the Terrans _did_ deliberately
>refrain from helping the Vilani. I do consider it unlikely that it =
happened
>on very many of them.

Which means that the PoD is unlikely to have been what the Vilani claim =
it to be --
or to have killed anywhere *near* as many Vilani as it did. The old "stab=
 in the
back" claims, as I suggested.

>>>are mostly attenuated live strains and the Vilani have a high rate of
>>>negative reactions. Remember the Vilani immunioresponse system has =
been
>>=20
>>Where is it stated in "canon" that the Vilani have a high rate of negative
>>reactions?=20
>
>Nowhere, as far as I know. It is a good stab at explaining a bit of canon,
>though.

Yep, but assuming that it's all part of a Vilani "nationalist" version of the "stab in
the back" of Hitler and the Nazis is equally valid.

>Or maybe just lacking one vital bit. A bit that wasn't important until they
>encountered the Terrans. That would account for all Phillip's problems
>with the present explanation. Even if the Vilani did have a reasonable
>way of dealing with some diseases and quarantine measures to deal with
>others, the Plague of Duskir would still work if it was a single, specific

But this would not reduce the effectiveness of antibiotics -- and probably have
no effect on antibacterials, either.

Phil
- ---------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU)
Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)
Designer, Standard Role Playing (PGD)

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1776
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Tuesday, September 2 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1777



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Keanou
Late Digest Resonse: Re: "Calibration Points"
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1764
Re: Keanou
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1775
Domain of Deneb has moved!
Re: Universal Range Bands
Emperors and Accidents (was Conspiracy Theories)
Re: Alternaties (B5, ME, House, .pdf)  (was RE: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!))
Re: Task Resolution
Re: Hypersonic grav skateboards...
Re: Battle dress turtles  (was RE: Traveller-digest V1997 #1764)
FFS Equations Web page
Re: FF&S 2 Conversions
Re: Near-C missiles?
Attn: Mitch Schwartz
Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations
Re: FFS2 Spreadsheets?
PE & Trade System
Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations
Re: Task Resolution
Re: Cenventional weapons in space

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 01 Sep 1997 20:48:32 -0700
From: "Glenn M. Goffin, Esq." <gmgoffin@pacbell.net>
Subject: Keanou

> From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>

> The planet Keanou (Spinward Marches 2411) is a problem to me. In _Spinward
> Can anybody suggests how a planet can go from 4 to 15% open water in 5 years

Interesting problem.  Suppose that the 4% didn't include polar ice caps,
and in five years the planet heated up enough to melt some of the polar
ice caps.  What could have caused that?  Maybe a collision with a big
asteroid knocked it into a warmer orbit?

Suppose that there was plenty of water underground, but it couldn't get
to the surface. During the Fifth Frontier War, bombardment made some big
holes and created a new ocean. 

- --Glenn

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 2 Sep 1997 00:54:31 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Late Digest Resonse: Re: "Calibration Points"

Leonard wrote:

>Still, it's not like you have to get the ships up to huge velocities.
>Consider, if a ship jumps in and is 100,000 km away, at 30 km/sec, it
>takes less than an hour to get to you. So the tug just needs to boost
>the ship up to that speed, then slow it down again when it gets close.
>(Note, the tugs will be aiming the ships to "just miss" the base. That
>way, if there's a problem and they can't brake it in time, it'll just
>sail on past, and another tug can rescue the ship and tug.


Why not use the fact that jump conserves momentum and give you ship a low
velocity towards the refueling station on jump emergence? Of course should
you misjump the tug is going to hae to chase you a bit. ;-)

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"Omnia Mutantur Nihil Interit"  -  Sandman 'The Wake'
"Everything Changes, but nothing is truly lost" 

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 01 Sep 1997 19:59:03 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1764

At 04:59 PM 9/1/97 PST, you wrote:

>Well, tankers look at things differently. A lot of them are willing to
>give up the flexibility for the protection at least when they have to
>get out of the tank in hostile territory. :-)

Heh. Tankers.. I "killed" an entire T-72 crew at Ft. Irwin after their tank
rolled over a "landmine."  They got out to explain the repair procedure to
the judge, and I picked off one of the crewmembers who was walking near the
front of the tank.  The entire crew went for cover on the side of tank
facing me.  I just waited for one of them to pop his head up to look for me
on the other ridge, then shot him.

After all four of them were declared dead, I walked down and pointed out
that their tanker helmets didn't have MILES recievers on them, so why did
they persist in thinking that I was in front of them taking head shots?

If looks could kill....
- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 02 Sep 1997 20:46:06 +0100
From: Bruce E J Lewis <bruce@legend.ftech.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Keanou

>> From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
>
>> The planet Keanou (Spinward Marches 2411) is a problem to me. In _Spinward
>> Can anybody suggests how a planet can go from 4 to 15% open water in 5
years
>
	What about a ship that for some unknown reason tried to enter jump too
near a gas giant? Part of the gg's gases were blasted into space, and
almost dissipated when it entered Keanou's orbit. The gases didn't happen
to be too particularly dangerous, coincidentally, but they caused chemical
reactions in the polar ice caps that melted them enough to change the
planet's physical characteristic.

	See ya...


Bruce E J Lewis - mailto:bruce@legend.ftech.co.uk
Telephone - 0956-506527

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 2 Sep 1997 15:54:58 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Macpherson <john35@wharton.upenn.edu>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1775

 
> From: LrdRhys01@aol.com
> 
> I have FFS2 and I'm starting to use it. But, I don't seem to be able to
> locate any conversion tables etc.. to convert the Armor Factors into Starship
> USP form. The USP chart in back of Starships doesn't result in armor ratings
> anywhere close to the example ships. Am I missing the obvious or what? Any
> help would be appreciated and seriously praised to all concerned. 
> 
> Email at lrdrhys01@aol.com

	I'm sending this to the list rather than you personally because I 
think other folks might be interested to hear.  The FF&S2 materials all 
had their toughnesses increased so that they would match up with the T4 
personal combat system.  To convert back to FF&S1 values so you can use 
the USD chart in Starship, multiply the FF&S2 values by (10.5/15).  To 
convert from FF&S1 to FF&S2, use the reciprocal.
 
- -JM

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 2 Sep 1997 12:59:57 -0700
From: Chris Griffen <cgriffen@cisco.com>
Subject: Domain of Deneb has moved!

Brief self-indulgent gratuitous plug:

My website, a TNE-intensive Traveller site aptly titled "The Domain of
Deneb," has moved. It may now be found at:

http://www.best.com/~cgriffen/traveller/deneb.shtml

Best,

Chris Griffen


- --------------------------------------------------------------
Christopher Griffen                      Phone: (408) 527-7189
Cisco Systems, Inc.                      Fax:   (408) 527-0452
NMBU Technical Publications              cgriffen@cisco.com

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 02 Sep 1997 21:05:37 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: Universal Range Bands

On Mon, 1 Sep 1997 16:41:08 PST, Leonard Erickson wrote:

> In mail you write:
> 
> > On Sun, 31 Aug 1997 13:10:04 PST, Leonard Erickson wrote:
> >
> >> BTW, I'd not be at all surprised to find that you could build a near c
> >> missile using an ion drive, even though the accel would only be 1/100th
> >> g. 
> >
> > The trick would involve positioning the missile and beginning to
> > accelerate it during the *Third* Frontier War so that it reaches its
> > target by the time the *Fifth* Frontier War starts (assuming the target
> > didn't change hands during the *Fourth* Frontier War).
> 
> It only takes 354 days to get to 1% of c at 1/100th of a g.

You said a "near c" missile.  And a lot could happen in 354 days :)

James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 2 Sep 1997 14:19:32 -0700
From: scharlto@ifsna.com
Subject: Emperors and Accidents (was Conspiracy Theories)

To bring this a little more "on topic"; it seems to me that the various
Imperia have had a long enough history to have seen an Emperor killed in a
Grav Vehicle accident, or even in a starship accident.  I imagine the
Solomani would generally say "Oh well, that's life" and keep on as normal,
but what about our more cautious and conservative Vilani friends?  Would
they even allow a member of the Imperial family onto a Grav Vehicle?  Would
the Emperor be allowed to risk himself on a starship (in the Third
Imperium, the Emperors certainly did both, but the Vilani Empire might have
their poor Shadow Emperor closeted away for fear of accidents as much as
anything else).

The papparazzi element probably would not be as large, simply because the
Emperor would have a lot more to say about bothersome reporters than our
modern celebrities and royals do today.  I mean, while a modern celeb could
complain or maybe even file suit, the Emperor or his retinue could actually
kill the offender, with no chance of retribution.  "Normal" Imperial
celebrities would probably get a lot of holovid attention, but I would
suspect the live papparazzi would be replaced by enterprising people
controlling small armies of remote-controlled gravitic holocam robots,
which could follow the intended victim much less obtrusively, and ALWAYS be
focused on the target.  Papparazzi might even hire technical specialists
with good EMS sensor arrays to intercept communications to and from the
target, or use the extensive computer networks (on hi-tech worlds) to
attempt to learn the target's travel plans ahead of time.

Of course, the target could do many of the same things; hire folks to
operate "interference" robots to harrass the papprazzi robots, have a
technician specializing in encryption technologies, or even a few clever
people to flood the computer networks with false or misleading travel
plans.  So at least even a non-noble celebrity could have a decent chance
to fight back against the future papparazzi.

Too bad Diana did not have access to that sort of thing.

PS - This whole Diana thing marks a strange sort of first for me; I knew
nothing about it until somebody (Harold Hale, I think) posted a message to
the TNE-RCES list while I was online Saturday evening.  A minute later, and
I would have gone to bed without having heard about it.  Its really quite a
shame, though...

Steven Charlton

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 02 Sep 1997 21:38:18 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: Alternaties (B5, ME, House, .pdf)  (was RE: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1 (LONG!))

On Mon, 1 Sep 1997 19:41:54 -0500, David Reed wrote:

> James:
> 
> I took your challenge, and perused, thoroughly, my copy of B5.  *shudder* 
>  Having NEVER watched the show, I'm somewhat intrigued by some of the 
> tech, bemused by the PPG nonsense, and, well, I'll leave the aliens out of 
> it.

Wow.  You've gotta be the only gamer on the planet that bought the RPG
after NEVER watching a single episode :)

> My only complaint (it's really a nice SET of tables) is that it has too 
> little randomness in injuries, or task resolution all together.  Plus or 
> minus 5 on a scale of anywhere from 2 to 25 difficulty?

MT used an identical set of probabilities using only 2d6, it just
isn't as noticeable (7, +/-5).  The target number spread is a bit
harsh, but that can easily be changed by the referee.  I'm planning on
converting it for T4.1 use later on.


James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 2 Sep 1997 15:03:10 -0700
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

Tue, 02 Sep 1997 01:07:00 GMT, jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
[OK, this has degenerated to nothing more than an attempt to
justify the claim that I shouldn't disagree wtih Kenneth
and that he is right to call me names.  I will make no
further replies to James either.]
>> No I didn't.  I would suggest you keep people straigt before
>> you decide to start deciding who should be call names and who
>> is taking things too personally.

>Follow your own advice then.  The individual that you have been
>trading email back and forth with for the past week is not "Kevin",
>but "Kenneth".  The fact that you don't even know the name of the
>individual you are at words with is ridiculous.

I mearly wrote the wrong name in.  You attacked me based on
posts I never wrote.  I will let everyone decide for themselves
with is worse.

>> Yes.  For _some_ change.  Not for _your_ change.
>
>This is irrelevant.

No.  It is only my central point.  If you consider the point
unimportant, one wonders why you go to so much effort to post
against it.

>A number of TMLers agreed that the "stat + skill" issue was flawed--

[deletions]

>This created a need for
>a solution, and KBv2.0 was but one of the solutions put forward.

No.  It created what _some_ people see as a need for a solution.

>I believe there was much more to your posting that resulted in Ken's
>"butt" response than you care to admit.

And one might wonder if there was much more intolerance for opposing
postions in your attacks on me.  Especially since I have already
pointed out that he was calling me a butt based on posts I didn't
write.  Yet you still search for a way to justify callng me names.
I have not called Kenneth any names at all.

>He didn't only ask "Why must
>you be such a butt" but many other questions regarding other comments
>you made as well.  Obviously, you touched a nerve.

Gee, do you know anyone who likes being called names?  I personally
think you are being worse than the "butt" I was called.  But if
I has calle _you_ names certainly would have attacked
for it (you have tried to attack me for less).   One can
exchange attacks on each others judgement until the sun burns
out.  I might be better to refrain from them in  the first place.
If your positon is solid, you don't need them.

>> Then one might wonder why you posted your message to the list...

>LOL!  I posted to the list in order to support some of Ken's valid
>points, clear up a few misconceptions, and make a few of my own, not
>to belittle you!

Ironic, since you first post primarily said that it was OK to
call me names and the only thing you have ever done about the
point I have raised is call it "irrelevant" and ignore it while
you proceed to assert your own postion without addressing that
you _can't_ take it as a given that there is a problem when
not everyone agrees with you.  I will leave it
to others whether you judgement on what is "personal" doesn't
depend on who's ox is being goard.

>This, too, will be my final post on the subject, since I thought it
>was necessary to defend myself.

Ironic since you have mostly posted in favor of calling me names
while I have not resorted to such tatics.

_______________________________________________________________
DSummers@Mail.ARC.NASA.gov

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 2 Sep 1997 15:12:05 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: Re: Hypersonic grav skateboards...

On Mon, 1 Sep 1997, Roderick Darroch Elliott wrote:
 
> 	I must be slowing down here; why didn't _I_ think of putting the
> biggest possible drive in my skateboard...  It's a great idea though; on a
> vacuum world you could have all sorts of fun with a High Perf S.A.T. grav
> skateboard or two.  A combat involving a couple of those and a few gauss
> pistols and a big Valles Marineris-like canyon could really liven up an
> evening's roleplaying, heheheh... >:)

Oh what fun this could turn out to be...I never _thought_ of doing it in a
vaccuum...man, hitting one of the canyon walls would make a specTACular
mess!

We could get really, REALLY sick and use lances instead of gauss pistols
:->

(strains of "Wipeout" cranked up to max volume start coming out of the
S.A.T. skunkworks...you know...there's a lot of leftover room in that hull
 you could probably even stick something nasty in there;-)

heheheh 

Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 2 Sep 1997 15:59:58 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: Re: Battle dress turtles  (was RE: Traveller-digest V1997 #1764)

On Tue, 2 Sep 1997, David Reed wrote:
> 
> Back to the original quote...  If you're IN A TANK in hostile territory, 
> what in the stars would coerce you to get OUT?

Two things: a non moving tank, and infantry with cheap antitank weapons.

Actually, If the tank's aint moving...I would get the hell out on general
principles.

And it was an argument of the efficacy of a kung fu jedi master monk of
the six flowers ninja killing machine with their bare hands vs.
battledress. ;-P

Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 2 Sep 1997 23:28:06 +0000
From: "Stuart C. Squibb" <scs@vectis.demon.co.uk>
Subject: FFS Equations Web page

I have just posted the preliminary version of a web page with 'fixed' 
FFS equations. Comments and the inevitable flames awaited with 
interest! Please note, the equations are displayed as GIF files. Each 
is approx 2K long so the page will take a while to load.

http://www.vectis.demon.co.uk/traveller/FFSEquations.html

Let me know what you think.

Stuart.
- --------------------------------------------------------------
Stuart C. Squibb       | Home: scs@vectis.demon.co.uk
Isle of Wight, England | Work: Stuart.Squibb@iwha.swest.nhs.uk
- --------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 2 Sep 1997 19:25:04 -0400
From: "Chris Cox" <chriscox@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: FF&S 2 Conversions

T. L. Rice wrote:
> I have FFS2 and I'm starting to use it. But, I don't seem to be able to
> locate any conversion tables etc.. to convert the Armor Factors into
Starship
> USP form. 

There are no conversion tables.  From what I understand, IG didn't give the
designers of FF&S2 any ideas of what sort of game units would be needed.  So,
the designers went ahead and used real world units figuring that they could
be converted into whatever game units will be needed later.  I think that
there's going be a new ship combat system for T4.1 and it will be different
than what is currently in T4.

> The USP chart in back of Starships doesn't result in armor ratings
> anywhere close to the example ships. Am I missing the obvious or what? Any
> help would be appreciated and seriously praised to all concerned. 

You need to multiply the armor rating that you calculate with Starships by 10
to get a the correct USP armor rating.  This little detail was omitted from
Starships.

Chris Cox
"Goldfish shoals, nibbling at my toes,
Fun, fun, fun, in the sun, sun, sun..."
(chriscox@ix.netcom.com)
The Draconis Cluster Traveller pages
(http://users.aol.com/yanbeck/trav.htm)

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 02 Sep 1997 20:17:30 -0400
From: Daniel Ray Lane <drlane@pinn.net>
Subject: Re: Near-C missiles?

Leonard Erickson wrote:
> 
> In mail you write:
> 
> > No, but they could use Lorentz force steering.  The higher the velocity
> > the higher the deflection force in a mag field.
> 
> But the only available magnetic field is the one "embedded" in the
> solar wind. And that varies *greatly* in magnitude and direction. Also,
> attempting to use it for steering is more likely to result in
> deflection of the solar wind particles as they mass less.
> 
> --
> Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
>  shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
> leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

Dost thou imply that the sun has no magnetosphere?  How about creating one 
artificially using the ship as a source?  Also, I wouldn't presume empty space.  
Most battles will probably take place in the inner system where there exist 
objects to contest.  And gas giants, of course have wonderful mag fields
(at least sometimes).  In other words, I'm thinking in terms of a complex
battlespace rather than an empty one.  But for really deep space, the Lorentz
force steering using a static ship based field (or maybe a drone) would be
an interesting method.  I'd really rather not do the math.  I'll just twiddle
the field strength arbitrarily using funky superdense superconductors.

- -Dan Lane

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 2 Sep 1997 17:45:27 -0700
From: "Roger Sanger" <rodge@case.cyberspace.com>
Subject: Attn: Mitch Schwartz

Dear Mitch (ted7@world.std.com),

I've tried contacting you via email, but my messages keep getting
bounced by your ISP.

Please ask your system administrator what is causing the bounces.

...and drop me a note at rodge@cyberspace.com.

Roger Sanger


(If someone would forward this message to Mitch at ted7@world.std.com,
I'd really appreciate it.  Please drop me a note to confirm.)

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 2 Sep 1997 20:38:56 -0400 (EDT)
From: SemoFetus@aol.com
Subject: Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations

>	Huh?  Heplar has exactly the same fuel efficiency in both 
>versions.  The fuel consumption is expressed in terms of different units, 
>which may be throwing you, but after casual inspection it appears exactly 
>the same to me.  Do you know something I don't?

>-JM

I guess I do.  The best way to say this is to just do the math on it.  A
HEPlaR chamber that is 2 m3 will use the same amount of fuel under both
systems, BUT, the way that thrust is figured out under each system is
different (old fashioned FF&S: 1 tonne of thrust per 14 kl, FF&S2: 1 tonne of
thrust per kl).

When I was working on the craft, I didn't check against FF&S1 so I mistakenly
said fuel efficiency when I should have said just plain efficiency...

Semo

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 02 Sep 1997 21:08:30 -0400 (EDT)
From: tconnor@pop3.utoledo.edu (Tim Connors)
Subject: Re: FFS2 Spreadsheets?

>Has anyone done an Excel spreadsheet for FFS2 yet?  I seem to remember
>hearing one mentioned in passing...
>--
>+-------------------------------------------------+
>|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
>|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
>|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
>|*************************************************|
>|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
>|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
>|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
>|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
>|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
>+-------------------------------------------------+
>
        I had worked up a couple of simple ones -- for hulls and spinal
mounts -- but school started today; so until I'm sure of where I stand, I'm
a "reader" on the list, not a "writer."

Tim Connors

You can't fall off of the floor -- most human beings require three years to
learn this.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 2 Sep 1997 20:19:31 -0500
From: "Ernest N Rowland" <erowland@ionet.net>
Subject: PE & Trade System

Let me add my (somewhat late) vote for "Pocket Empires"
as still the best T4 volume to date.

I have a few ideas for incorporating the Economic Extension 
into the regular trading system:

   Resources:
      I would interpret this to yield larger cargo sizes for worlds 
      with larger amounts of exploitable resources.  I have not 
      been able to find the lot size table in T4 rulebook, but in 
      TNE/MT they were:

         major:      1D + 10 Td
         minor:      1D + 5  Td
         incidental: 1D      Td

      The new table would be:
         major:      1D + 2*Res Td
         minor:      1D + 1*Res Td
         incidental: 1D         Td

   Labor
      Hmmm... cheaper goods from a larger labor pool?

   Infrastructure
      The better the infrastructure, the easier it is to get goods to 
      and from market.  This would result in more cargos available
      at worlds with higher infrastructures.  A new cargo table:

         Population  Available at Sourceworld
           Digit     Major       Minor       Incidental
         ----------  ----------------------------------
             0       -           -           -
             1       1D-10+I     1D- 9+I     -
             2       1D- 9+I     1D- 8+I     -
             3       1D- 8+I     1D- 7+I     -
             4       1D- 7+I     1D- 6+I     -
             5       1D- 6+I     1D- 5+I     -
             6       1D- 5+I     1D- 4+I     1D- 9+I
             7       1D- 4+I     1D- 3+I     1D- 9+I
             8       1D- 3+I     1D- 2+I     1D- 8+I
             9       1D- 2+I     1D- 1+I     1D- 8+I
             A       1D- 1+I     1D+ 0+I     1D- 7+I

   Culture
      High culture manufactured goods will have greater demand. Subtract
      target Culture from source Culture to get x100Cr mod to selling
price.

   Planetary Demand
      Local demand can make it harder to bargain for cargoes, 
      or conversely make it very easy to unload a shipment at a profit.

      let N be the trade imbalance for the current year
         add N * 100Cr to the purchase cost of any cargo 
                              bought at this world
         add N * 100Cr to the selling price of any cargo 
                              sold on this world

         excess of 3 means low demand, so
            (easy to buy <-> hard to sell)
            -300Cr to buy (readily available), and
            -300Cr to sell (no market for it).

         deficit of 1 means high demand, so
            (hard to buy <-> easy to sell)
            +100Cr to buy (low availability), and
            +100Cr to sell (good market)

      Note:  I'm using the <-> symbol to mean equivalence, not 
             multiplication!

- -- <...but pity stayed his hand.  "It's a pity I've run out of bullets," he
thought...> - BOTR xxii

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 02 Sep 1997 21:40:21 -0400 (EDT)
From: tconnor@pop3.utoledo.edu (Tim Connors)
Subject: Re: "Calibration Points" or Deep Space Stations

>>	Huh?  Heplar has exactly the same fuel efficiency in both 
>>versions.  The fuel consumption is expressed in terms of different units, 
>>which may be throwing you, but after casual inspection it appears exactly 
>>the same to me.  Do you know something I don't?
>
>>-JM
>
>I guess I do.  The best way to say this is to just do the math on it.  A
>HEPlaR chamber that is 2 m3 will use the same amount of fuel under both
>systems, BUT, the way that thrust is figured out under each system is
>different (old fashioned FF&S: 1 tonne of thrust per 14 kl, FF&S2: 1 tonne of
>thrust per kl).
>
        Actually, FF&S2: 1 tonne per 10 kl -- still, a 40% loss.

>When I was working on the craft, I didn't check against FF&S1 so I mistakenly
>said fuel efficiency when I should have said just plain efficiency...
>
>Semo
>

Tim Connors

You can't fall off of the floor -- most human beings require three years to
learn this.

------------------------------

Date: Wed,  3 Sep 97 01:24:00 GMT 
From: s.johnson107@genie.com
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

On Wed, 27 Aug 1997 09:54:14, CardSharks@aol.com Wrote...
> Those interested in the task debate should email me and request the
> file. It is an ascii file.
     Surely you jest!  You mean you collected ALL of that Thermonuclear Flame
War???  Marc, I'm worried about you! <GRIN>

Stephen

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 2 Sep 1997 19:14:04 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Cenventional weapons in space

This guy makes some good points...

[re-mailed to you from rec.arts.sf.science]
[the original seemed to come from gwinner@northnet.org]




Das Miller <dasmiller@aol.com> wrote in article
<19970831002500.UAA28071@ladder02.news.aol.com>...
> from arirabkin@geocities.com (Ari Rabkin)
> <arirabkin-2908971733200001@cu-dialup-1506.cit.cornell.edu>
> 
> (the other-other poster was me; I'm not going to try to keep track of all
> the message IDs)

> True, but I remember that the allies were often appalled to find out how
> few Japanese had been killed by the incredible bombardments they did as
> part of the Pacific campaign. 

Depends on what type of fire was conducted.  All fire support has
essentially two 'types' of fire; Neutralization or Destruction. 
Destruction fire takes much more ammo, as the Forward Observer has to
adjust the hit of the rounds very close (say, 10m), as opposed to just
within the ECR (Effective Casualty Radius) of the round.  (Remember, a
Casualty is NOT a death).

Some of the WWII campaigns were done very well.  One good example of
incredible bombardments that was only partially effective was Iwo Jima. 
The Navy bombarded the island for 30 days (and nights), BUT -- the didn't
employ destructive fires; just neutralization.  Thus, they did little real
damage to the heavy fortifications on the shore.

Off the top of my head I can't remember a good popular example of an
operation that was done correctly; most of the well done landings weren't
big battles (as it should be) so aren't popularly well known.

The Amphibious Landing has been referred to as the most difficult of all
military operations; you can't retreat!  It takes a precise application of
several elements.  Pre-landing bombardment of the RIGHT TYPE is essential
also.

It should be noted that by the end of the War, Marine Doctrine was so good
that at Okinawa, the Japanese didn't even bother to oppose the landing. 
That's interesting to me: instead of opposing the Marines at the shore line
where they can't move around, can't use their Artillery and only limited
organic fire support (i.e. no tanks, just the Amtracks), they chose to let
the Marines land unopposed.

Now, to stay on topic, how does this translate to Space combat?

I think that any 'landings' of troops that doesn't take some of these same
principles into account will have incredible casualties.  

o-Landing a craft from Orbit is not easy, especially if someone is
peppering the air with Ack Ack.  Thus, neutralization of shore emplacements
(uh, ground AA batteries) will be very important.  
o-Piloting craft down, and the fire support during the Space to Ground
assault will use craft that are hybrids of ground and space craft.  These
craft will probably be unique to the Space Marine Corps / Navy; a pure
atmospheric fighter (Air Force) won't cut it, and a purely space based
craft won't cut it either.  These hybrids, like the Amphibious Tractors
(Amtracks) will be heavier and lower performance than either special
purpose craft, but will be far better than the 'wrong' craft.
o-The regular Army, and Regular Navy (space ships) won't use these
specialized techniques; it'll take a specialized Corps of dedicated
professionals.  Furthermore, these guys will be nuts; once you start an
attack run / de-orbit burn, you're committed.  Move forward or Die.  That's
not for the feint of heart.
o-There will be specialized teams that will do things like take out
(stealth) orbital platforms.  These will take the place of "Underwater
Demolition Teams", sort of like a cross between the Navy Seals and
demolition guys.  Modern Day UDT teams train with the seals, but go on to
take more demolition courses.  (Underwater demolition of course ...)
o-Some type of 'fast' delivery system to inject these ground assault troops
will be required.  Modern day Navy has specialized ships with internal
'well decks' to permit the troops to fill the assault boats and spit them
out rapidly.  These ships will be somewhat special purpose, but necessary
for a real assault.  Regular capital Navy ships won't have the Marine
berthing, or the docking facilities to launch the hybrid ships quite so
easily.

Without all of this, you could conquer a planet and they'd just move
underground.  At some point, it takes people (uh, mobile AI units) to take
a planet.  You can bombard all you want but all you do is wipe out the
planet you're trying to take.

                == John ==
                == Capt, USMC (Hon Ret)
- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1777
***********************************
Traveller-digest    Wednesday, September 3 1997    Volume 1997 : Number 1778



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

RE: TL 16 (was Re: RoM/Terra TL)
Re: Sea Bears
Re: Keanou
Re: Task Resolution
commands
Re: Near-C missiles?
Re: Keanou
Re: Cenventional weapons in space
Re: Sea Bears
Re: Keanou
Re: Sea Bears
Re: Hypersonic grav skateboards...
Flamsteed Fleet Tanker
Re: Plague of Duskir

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 15:02:43 +1200
From: Brody  Dunn <brody@intersol.co.nz>
Subject: RE: TL 16 (was Re: RoM/Terra TL)

On Monday, 1 September 1997 17:56, Peter Newman
[SMTP:pnewman@alaska.net] wrote:
> Well actually they could have had a High Common TL of 15 but had a Heavy
> Military TL of 14.  Then a Tl 15 planet would be producing TL 14
> troops.  I am not saying they were TL 15 but (using World Builders
> Handbook) a world can quite easily have military forces at a TL
> different from their High Common Tech Level, Terra could have been one
> of these planets.

It does seem unlikely to me that Military Tech on most worlds would ever
lag behind common TL.  After all on Terra (now) a good portion of our
advances have come from Military based research (I include the space
program here as well)

brody

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 02 Sep 97 22:41:37 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: Sea Bears

On 09/02/97 at 01:08 AM,  jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay) said:

>> I have a friend who raises chiuhuas (sp?) the most useless bundles of
>> protein ever assembled on Earth, but she loves the little walking
>> menaces...

I understand the Aztecs just *loved* chiuhuas..deep fried, of course.

Maybe that's how the Zho thought of the Sea Bears. ;->

Eris
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 02 Sep 97 22:54:31 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: Keanou

On 09/01/97 at 08:48 PM,  "Glenn M. Goffin, Esq." <gmgoffin@pacbell.net>
said:

>> From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>

>> The planet Keanou (Spinward Marches 2411) is a problem to me. In _Spinward
>> Can anybody suggests how a planet can go from 4 to 15% open water in 5 years

>Interesting problem.  Suppose that the 4% didn't include polar ice caps,
>and in five years the planet heated up enough to melt some of the polar
>ice caps.  

That should be possible, but anything that could cause that big a change
would have had *very* unpleasant effects on the biosphere.

>What could have caused that?  Maybe a collision with a big
>asteroid knocked it into a warmer orbit?

I don't think that's too likely.  A big collision would have thrown up a
dust cloud that would have blocked out sunlight and frozen the planet..like
what probably happened on Earth 65 million years ago.  A *really* big
collision (one large enough to radically alter the planet's orbit) would be
SO BIG it probably would have sterilized the planet and maybe even
fractured it.

Some ideas:

If the star is a variable, it might have flared.

If the planet's population was TL8+ the inhabitants could have used solar
mirrors to melt ice caps, or water frozen in sub-surface aquifers.


Eris
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 04:57:06 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

>OK, this has degenerated to nothing more than an attempt to
> justify the claim that I shouldn't disagree wtih Kenneth
> and that he is right to call me names. 

Jesus! David.  Nobody has said that calling you names is OK.  What 
James said was that you were rude, and he can see my justification in 
calling you a "butt".

I posted to somebody else's question, and you took that opportunity 
to be rude.  You started all of this, and you shouldn't have been so 
dad-gummed rude.  

If you hadn't been rude in the first place, you wouldn't be defending 
yourself right now.  You should just watch what you say if you don't 
like the heat.

> I will make no
> further replies to James either.

Yeah?  That's what you said before you posted this one.

Kenneth.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 2 Sep 1997 22:01:52 -0800
From: "Zane H. Healy" <healyzh@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: commands

| Zane H. Healy                    | UNIX Systems Adminstrator |
| healyzh@ix.netcom.com (primary)  | Linux Enthusiast          |
| healyzh@holonet.net (alternate)  | Mac Programmer            |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------+
| For Empire of the Petal Throne and Traveller Role Playing,   |
| and the collecting of Classic Computers with info on them.   |
| see http://www.dragonfire.net/~healyzh/                      |

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 09:35:30 +0100
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: Re: Near-C missiles?

>But the only available magnetic field is the one "embedded" in the
>solar wind. And that varies *greatly* in magnitude and direction. Also,
>attempting to use it for steering is more likely to result in
>deflection of the solar wind particles as they mass less.

What about the galactic magnetic field?
(not that I think these near c KKVs reasonable - just for the sake of argument)


/Anders Backman
Aniware AB
anders.backman@aniware.se

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 09:59:27 +0100
From: "Nick Munn" <N.S.Munn@sheffield.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Keanou

> >Can anybody suggests how a planet can go from 4 to 15% open water in 5 years
> >or less?

The Fremen suddenly start irrigating with their stored water 
supply 8-)

(Keanou is IIRC from Twilight's Peak a/the source of "dust spice".)

Or iceteroid imports, let down reaaaaal slowly.


Nick

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 03 Sep 1997 10:14:11 GMT
From: johnl@vnet.net (John Lansford)
Subject: Re: Cenventional weapons in space

On Tue, 2 Sep 1997 19:14:04 PST, you wrote:


>Off the top of my head I can't remember a good popular example of an
>operation that was done correctly; most of the well done landings weren't
>big battles (as it should be) so aren't popularly well known.

The landings on Kwajalein and Eniwetok were successful because of the
heavy pre-landing bombardments. The Japanese positions were nearly
obliterated and the Marines landed with little opposition.

>It should be noted that by the end of the War, Marine Doctrine was so good
>that at Okinawa, the Japanese didn't even bother to oppose the landing. 
>That's interesting to me: instead of opposing the Marines at the shore line
>where they can't move around, can't use their Artillery and only limited
>organic fire support (i.e. no tanks, just the Amtracks), they chose to let
>the Marines land unopposed.

It was simple. The Japanese could not maneuver or support a threatened
position by defending on the beach. If the USN could see the position
before the landing occurred, it died. Direct fire naval gunfire was
VERY effective; nothing could stand up to a 14" or 16" shell hitting
it. 

The Japanese then began building their defenses out of direct visual
observation of the water, knowing that indirect fire was not nearly as
effective as direct fire against their fortifications. Only on atolls
where there was not enough room to try this did they revert back to
the shoreline defense.

>Now, to stay on topic, how does this translate to Space combat?

If it's visible, it's dead. If it gives off some form of emissions
(i.e. it's visible), it's dead. Only positions that have strong active
defenses can survive when the invading fleet arrives, unless it's a
meson projector buried deep in the planet. In that case, the fleet has
a problem now...


>o-There will be specialized teams that will do things like take out
>(stealth) orbital platforms. 

Orbital platforms are by definition visible. Unless they have massive
point defenses, a fleet will destroy them as their first objective.
The problem are the meson guns mounted on the planet. These need your
strike teams landing on the planet to destroy the fire control
centers. Unfortunately, there can be multiples of these FC stations
for each meson gun.

>Without all of this, you could conquer a planet and they'd just move
>underground.  At some point, it takes people (uh, mobile AI units) to take
>a planet.  You can bombard all you want but all you do is wipe out the
>planet you're trying to take.

Once the invading fleet has neutralized the threat to itself, there's
really no point in fighting any longer on the ground. The fleet can
destroy anything that can be seen on the planet; it just depends on
how badly they want to win. If the planet has high tech anti-fleet
defenses (meson guns), they have a chance, because the fleet cannot
remain in orbit while the invasion proceeds. 

John Lansford

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 14:29:12 +0100
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: Re: Sea Bears

>Low-grade psi companion?  Perhaps, most Sea Bears aren't psi capable, but 1
>in a few thousand has a little potential..not as telepaths, maybe just as
>emotipaths.
>
>This would make them desirable pets/companions for the Zhodani.  Perhaps
>they seeded all those planets with them so larger numbers of "companions"
>could develop and be waiting for the arrival of the colonists.
>
>The Imperials, with their lack of interest in psychic abilities, have
>little or no suspicion that the Sea Bears are *anything* but non-sapient
>animals.
>
>Eris

Just because Zhos have psi doesn't mean everything they do has to do with
psi. They might like the taste of them, use them as pets, pest-control,
watch-dogs. They might have a fairly good model ecological minisystem where
Sea-bears play a big part etc.

The fact that Zhos have psi should be downplayed (IMHO) as most of the
population doesn't have it etc. Amercans have nukes all over the globe but
I don't think that implies they have nuclear powered dogs, nuclear
handguns, nuclear powered inflatable dolls etc (correct me if I'm wrong ;)


/Anders Backman
Aniware AB
anders.backman@aniware.se

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 15:08:24 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Keanou

First of all, thanks to everybody who responded to this and to the sea bears
question.

I wrote:
>>The planet Keanou (Spinward Marches 2411) is a problem to me. In _Spinward
>>Marches_, _Twilight's Peak_, and _The Traveller Adventure_ its hydrographics
>>score is 0, indicating that around 1105 it had a maximum of 4% free-standing
>>water. But in _Spinward Marches Campaign_ and the _Regency Sourcebook_ it
>>has a hydrographics score of 2, indicating that in 1110 (and 1202) it had a
>>minimum of 15% free-standing water.
>>
>>Can anybody suggests how a planet can go from 4 to 15% open water in 5 years
>>or less?

Daniel Ray Lane replied:

>Highly eccentric orbit resulting in close passage to its primary
>star (or perhaps a close companion, dwarf, or gas giant).  Close
>passage results in release of previously frozen underground ice
>deposits.

Yes, the closest I came to an idea of my own was that either a 4% ice cover
melted as the planet came closer to the sun or steaming hot water
precipitated out of the atmosphere as the planet move away from it, but I
simply didn't have the meteorological knowledge to say if that was 
plausible. Underground ice I didn't think of.

>Or, how about a big ice asteroid hydrofication project.

Paid by someone other than the planet's 2000 inhabitants, I hope! ;-)

Glenn Hoppe replied:

>2. Typographic Error.

Not in three different publications, surely?

>5. Increased vulcanism drives water underground into the air through huge 
>geysers.

The main problem is that it takes a lot of water to cover 11% of the surface.

>7. Scouts changed the way they measure the hyd. percentage. They now take 
>the planetary ice caps into account.

They always did. That's why you can have a vacuum planet with a hydrographic
score above 0.


Leonard Erickson replied:

>It's orbiting a *very* hot star, with a high eccenticity orbit. Surface
>temp is near boiling, and what you are seeing are the "seasonal"
>variations. In other words, at periastron it has 0, at apoastron it has
>15%. :-)
>
>You don't want to get caught in a storm on this world!


Peter Newman replied:

>It is probably a typo that was fixed.  In my (1st printing) copy of
>Spinward Marches it is listed as having a 0 hydrographics but is
>represented on the map by a solid dot (indicating water) rather than an
>empty circle (indicating a desert). 

IIRC, _Spinward Marches_ didn't give desert planets an empty circle. That
convention was introduced later.

>That notwithstanding here is an explanation.
>
>[...]

WOW! Talk about quick work! I've done a few WBH writeups myself, but this
is amazing. Good work. Just two question: Did you make sure the temperature
works out all right for a hydrographics score of 2 in 1202? ;-) And will
a glazier covering 4% of the surface supply enough water to cover an
additional 16% of the surface? 



      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 15:28:02 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Sea Bears

Douglas E. Berry writes:

>Perhaps the thought patterns of Sea Bears was soothing/erotic/interesting
>to the Nobles, and they brought them with them as pets. 

I like that idea. The only trouble with it is that if they were popular
Zhodani pets, then the Imperials would presumably know that and it should
have been mentioned in the orginal article. But it's a neat idea and I'm 
tempted to go with it anyway.

>When the Imperium muscled in, the Sea Bears had become entrenched on the 
>appropriate Zhodani worlds, and survived their masters' departure.

If things went the way I described, then the Sea Bears was established
already by the time the Zhodani returned in the early 100s.

Joseph "Chepe" Lockett writes:

>Quoth Hans Rancke-Madsen:
>>[Seabears] had "been used in pre-imperial colonization projects in the 
>>Jewell, Lianic, and Massina subsectors" (All subsectors adjacent to 
>>Chronor). I decided that the only two possibilities (that we know of) for 
>>having performed these colonization projects were the Ancients and the 
>>Zhodani,
>
>You're missing one -- "pre-Imperial" need not mean "prior to the founding
>of the Third Imperium."  It could just as easily refer to colonization
>projects carried out before Chronor was formally integrated into the
>Imperium.  

You're right, I didn't think of that. But Lianic (or is it Massina?) is
located inside what was Zhodani borders already in -1000 (that's when they
decided to remain inside those borders until they had consolidated (must
have been some problems there as they hadn't yet consolidated 2000 years
later, but that's another problem). So I think I'll stick to the Zhos as
the perpretators of this project.

>That said, I still rather like Doug Berry's psychically soothing
>sea-bears, for the alliterative as much as the imaginative value.... :-)

Me too ;-)

Eris Reddoch writes:

>Low-grade psi companion?  Perhaps, most Sea Bears aren't psi capable, but 1
>in a few thousand has a little potential..not as telepaths, maybe just as
>emotipaths.
>
>This would make them desirable pets/companions for the Zhodani.  Perhaps
>they seeded all those planets with them so larger numbers of "companions"
>could develop and be waiting for the arrival of the colonists.

Great minds seem to think alike. It is a good idea.

>The Imperials, with their lack of interest in psychic abilities, have
>little or no suspicion that the Sea Bears are *anything* but non-sapient
>animals.

But I'm not so sure about that. If the Sea Bears were such great pets then
they were presumably carried back to the Zhodani world in -1100 and would
be firmly established in 1100. The Imperials do have _some_ contact with
the Zhodani. Not that it would really be a problem if the Imperials knew,
would it?

Eric Nolan writes:

>Perhaps the Sea Bears merely have the most indiscriminate digestion of
>the wildlife the Zho's had available.  
>
>[...]
>
>Assuming that their adaptability is very high, then it is also safe to
>assume that they can be easily adapted as pets/work animals.

Another good idea, and another characteristic that would propably have been
mentioned in the original article. But come to think about it, that would
apply to almost anything we came up with, wouldn't it? Perhaps I should
just ignore that aspect.


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 09:00:15 -0500
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: Re: Hypersonic grav skateboards...

Bruce Johnson wrote:

>
>> 	I must be slowing down here; why didn't _I_ think of putting the
>> biggest possible drive in my skateboard...  It's a great idea though; on a
>> vacuum world you could have all sorts of fun with a High Perf S.A.T. grav
>> skateboard or two.  A combat involving a couple of those and a few gauss
>> pistols and a big Valles Marineris-like canyon could really liven up an
>> evening's roleplaying, heheheh... >:)
>
>Oh what fun this could turn out to be...I never _thought_ of doing it in a
>vaccuum...man, hitting one of the canyon walls would make a specTACular
>mess!


	Yeah; boom, splat, pop as the suit ruptures and the pulped contents
of the unfortunate thrasher's vac suit get sprayed all over the crash site
by depressurization.

>
>We could get really, REALLY sick and use lances instead of gauss pistols
>:->

	Even better!  Some really dumb, macho nobles decide to _joust_?!
Hilarious!  Of course, that'd be equally funny; impact, the momentum of
each nutcase gets (spectacularly or not depending on how fast they were
moving) cancelled out and they fall to the ground; the skateboards head for
orbit...


>
>(strains of "Wipeout" cranked up to max volume start coming out of the
>S.A.T. skunkworks...you know...there's a lot of leftover room in that hull
> you could probably even stick something nasty in there;-)


	A laser pistol or rifle, fired by a toe-pad trigger, has potential.
Is it just me, or is this whole scenario too warped to not write up for
something?




Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 03 Sep 97 10:41:57 -0400
From: Lewis Roberts <lewis@chara.gsu.edu>
Subject: Flamsteed Fleet Tanker

 Hi,
Here is the biggest ship I have made to date.  I was flipping through
Fighting Shiops of the Shattered Imperium, and for some reasone decided
to make a fleet tanker, One of the ships which refuels the rest of a
battle fleet after jumping to a hostile system.  The ship isn't
supposed to get into a fight, but I gave it lasers and missiles just in
case.  It has a 100 MFDs which can be used to control missiles or
laser, depending on the Captain's choice. I know a missile bay would
have been more effective, but the original went with turrets, so I
decided to go with them also. In addition, it would be easier for
someone to take out a missile bay rather than 120 missile barbettes.

There are TNE and T4 stats.  Both were built with FFS, but the T4 uses
the correct jump fuel and cerw requirments for T4 and the TNE uses the
correct formula for TNE. 
Enjoy,
Lewis
- ------------------------------
The Flamsteed Fleet tanker was an auxilury ship for the massive fleets
of the Third Imperium.  It never intended to enter battle, but in case it was
ambushed or forced into a fight it is equiped with several hundred
laser turrets, and missile barbettes.  It also has sufficient defense
equipment so as have the best chance to be able to survive an enemy
attack.These include a Meson screen, several hundred sandcasters and a
large AEMS Jammer. It also carries five 1000 ton monitors, to act as
pickets and guards.  If desired these ships can be replaced by jump
capable ships such as the Fer-de-Lance Destroyer Escort.

The ship is a giant flying wing, with massive fuels scoops along the wings.
Massive fuel droges hang from the underside of the ship, these allow it
to fufill its main goal, which is to refuel ships upon entering a
hostile system. This way the warships enter battle with full fuel
tanks, and while the battle progresses, the Flamsteed can fill its fuel
tanks, and purify the fuel or jump back to saftey. The ship also
carries significant cargo and can
carry supplies for other ships in the fleet.  In an emergency this
space can also be utilized for troop transport, hospital duty, or
something else. <P>


General Data				
Displacement: 500000 tons              Hull Armor: 40
Length: 593.34 meters                  Volume: 7000000 m3
Price: MCr 133012.1                    Target Size: VL
Configuration: Airframed Wedge         Tech Level: 15
Mass (Loaded/Empty): 2278258.3 / 1742776.5				

Engineering Data				
Power Plant: 189900 MW Fusion Power Plant, 1 year duration (18990 m3
fuel)				
Jump Performance: 4 (1750000 m3 fuel)				
G-Rating: 1G HEPlaR (115500 MW/G), Auxiliary High Efficiency CG (50000
MW)				
G-Turns: 60 (J3: 90.3; J2: 120.6; J1: 150.9; 181.2 using all jump
fuel), 14437.5         m3 fuel each				
Maint: 91610				

Electronics				
Computer: 3xTL-15 Fibre-optic computer (1.1 MW)				
Commo: 2xLaser (Unlimited; 0.3 MW),
       2xMaser (Unlimited; 0.6 MW), 
       Meson (1 hex;5 MW), 2xRadio (Unlimited; 20 MW)
Avionics: Imaging EMS, IGS positioning, 190 km/h NOE
Sensors: 2xAEMS (16 hex; 25 MW),
         2xPEMS (7 hex; 0.25 MW),
         Densitometer (0.4 MW), Neutrino Sensor (0.01 MW), 
ECM/ECCM: EMS Jammer (4 hex;18 MW), 
          Area Jammer (3 hex radius; 32.4 MW), 
Controls: Bridge with 473 bridge workstations, 1266 normal workstations

Armament
Offensive: 120xLaser Turret (42 MW; 1 crew),
           120xMissile Barbette (0.15 MW; 1 crew)
Defensive: Meson Screen Generator (PV=500; 312.5 MW; 1 Crew),
           120xSand Turret (1 MW; 1 crew)
Master Fire Directors: 100xTL-15 (6 Diff Mods; 10 hex; Msl 10 hex; 1.86 MW; 1 crew)

Accommodations
Life Support: Extended (418.9904 MW), Gravitic Compensators (10474.76 MW)
Crew: 2662 (2xManeuver, 2xElectronics, 1266xEngineer, 460xGunnery,   
     387xMaintenance, 100xFlight, 54xSteward, 22xMedic, 369xCommand)
Crew Accommodations: 1700xSmall Stateroom (0.5 kW), 205xLarge Stateroom (1 kW)
Passengers: None
Passenger Accommodations: None					
					
Other Facilities: 100xElectronics Shop (0.6 MW), 25xMachine Shop (1
MW), 50xSick Bay (0.8 MW)Emergancy Low Berth (2 kW)		
								
Cargo: 770000 m3 (55000 tons), 2200 Large Hatches, 2000 missiles in
magazine,           2264500 m3 fuel distribution tank		
								
Small Craft and Launch Facilities: 5x100-ton spacious hangar,
                                   5x1000-ton spacious hangar	
									
Air Locks: 5000							
			

Notes								
		
Total Fuel Tankage: 4899740 m3 (349981.4 tons) 			
							
Fuel scoops (2% of ship surface), fills tanks in 8.75 hours	
									
Fuel purification machinery (7000MW), 21 hours to refine 4899740 m3.
										
47.2 MW power surplus						
				
 
- - -------------------------------------------------------------------
T4 Starship Data						
Ship or Class Name and Type (Starship-V2)			
		
						
Tons: 500000 (Wedge AF)		Volume: 7000000 m3	Cost: 132929.43 MCr
Crew: 1251			High/Mid Pass: 0	Low Pass: 0
Cargo: 55000 tons		Controls: Fib(Bridge)	TL: 15

11 Size			      4 Jump Drive (31250 tons/Pc Fuel)			
6 Fire Control		      1 Maneuver (HEPlaR, 115500 MW)			
120xLaser Turrets2-2-2-2      0.8 Power Plant (189900 MW)			
120 Missile Barb 600 (300)    352831.4 Fuel (Scoop 40000, Refine
16666.7)			
			      10 Meson Screen (312.5 MW)			
			      120 Sandcasters (6000 cans)			
5xspacious hangar (100-ton)   0 Nuclear Damper			
5xspacious hangar (1000-ton)  16A 7P 4J Sensors			
			20 Armor, 27 Structure			

Crew: 2 Maneuver, 6 Electronics, 58 Engineer, 460 Gunnery, 387 Maintenance,
      100 Flight, 25 Steward, 45 Medic, 168 Command			
Accom: 205 large staterooms, 700 small staterooms, 1 low berths,
       1 emergency low berths
Average density: 0.33 ton/m3, the ship will float on water.			

 

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 16:46:41 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Plague of Duskir

Phillip McGregor writes:
>>From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
>>Phillip and Andrew, could you please keep your sentenses a bit shorter?
>>It enhances readability immensely.
> 
>I'll try.

You're failing. ;-)
 
>>Phillip, is 'canon-head' meant to be derogatory? It sounds a bit that way.
> 
>Yes, but in the *friendliest* possible way <grin>! And, yes, you equally
>well call *me* an "anti-canon-head" -- feel free!

Why? Is there some hidden merit in not caring for keeping the background
coherent? Or do you (as I suspect) mean something different than I read
when you use the words 'canon-head' and 'anti-canon-head'? To me there is
something good in sticking to canon merely from the increased likelihood
that I can use material created by someone else that is likewise sticking
to canon (or 'previously published material' (PPM for short), if you don't
like the term 'canon'.


>>>Then there's all those other "minor" human races -- we can assume that
>>>some at least had bugs that were benign to them but not too friendly to
>>>the Vilani;
> 
>>Very true. But none of these would affect all, or even a sizable
>>fraction of Vilani. Each would affect a tiny group of Vilani. One can
>>assume that the Vilani space-oriented culture developed effective
>>quarantine measures fairly quickly. Which would prevent the rest of the
>>Vilani from encountering those diseases.
>
>And this means that the effectiveness of any Biowar or Plague such as PoD
>would be much reduced. 

True. Any one plague is extremely unlikely to spread from one world to
another. You do realize that as written up, the Plague of Duskir is not
one particular plague, but a whole lot of different ones crrried to the
Vilani worlds by the Terrans?

>And it also means that the Vilani would be aware that
>such a thing was a problem and would know how to handle it.

They would know how to guard against its spread (always assuming, of
course, that the incubation period didn't run into years). Not much 
help when dealing with a massive number of carriers.
 
>>All very true. But you cannot jump to the conclusion that the solution
>>they came up with was to develop a deep understanding of biology or even
>>the germ theory of disease. Another solution would be rigorous
>>quarantine measures. And those would be absolutely no use against a horde 
>>of Terran immigrants.
>
>But, as I said, the *Terrans* would have the deep knowledge of biology
>and medical science ... and, unless we are going to accept that the
>Terrans either didn't care *or* deliberately set out to "thin" the Vilani 
>populace, they would have found it very easy to deal with the likelihood 
>of disease spreading.  

There's another possibility. That either the Terran state-of-the-art
medical knowledge was not capable of dealing with these problems (which
would indicate that the theory of one particular, hitherto unknown,
problem present in Vilani and not in Terrans were responsible) or the
really state-of-the-art technology was not available. Perhaps TL 13
medical technology requires Really Big Machines. Machinery that just
wasn't available at first on even TL 11 planets.
 
>>...the Vargr would be more of a problem, especially on those worlds that 
>>they shared. But again, the Vilani who survived sharing a world with Vargr 
>>could be those who survived by natural selection, and they would stay on 
>>that world and not pass on their immumity to the Vilani living in the other 
>>end of the Siru Zirka.
> 
>No, but it passes on the *idea* of diseases, and the *medical* (rather 
>than just quarantine) means of dealing with them. Which is (from my point 
>of view) what the whole argument is about!

I'm getting into this discussion late, so bear with me. What medical
techniques other than quarantine that would infallibly allow the Vilani
to survive any disease whatsoever brought by the Terrans are you talking
about?

>And the longstanding existence of the AAB means that Biowar and PoD would
>be quickly recognised for what they were and the AAB data could be used
>to jump start medical research. Consider the benefits of computers here 
>-- and the inevitable need for veterinary medicine for local food animals 
>where kept on a commercial basis.

You're postulating that the ability to recognize a problem gives the
ability to solve it in short order. There's plenty of AIDS and cancer
researchers that won't agree with you.

>>You're right. But said methods does not _have_ to include vaccination.
> 
>No, they don't *have* to ... but they are not a high tech item/development 
>as some people may think. 

True, but that works both ways. Just because Louis Pasteur discovered
vaccination at TL 4 is no guarantee that everybody will. Especially, as
I said, if there is practically no such thing as a weakened disease when 
it comes to the Vilani. Still, you are right in saying that it is likely
that someone did discover it, so if an alternative explanation will give
the same results, it would be preferrable.

>I'm simply indicating that the ability to deal with these sorts of
>diseases does not require a huge understanding of how they work.

Not if you have a Terran immune system, no ;-)
 
>But we know that the Vilani *did* occupy lots of planets that were =
>already inhabited.

Lots? Some, yes, but where do you get the 'lots'? The one I can recall
off-hand is Sylea (and there I believe they moved the Syleans onto
far-off reservations, didn't they? There may have been a good reason for
that.

>We know that they *did* allow "subject" races to move around.

What are you referring to here? 

>>But their measures would be less useful for the Vilani. You're
>>forgetting Andrew's second suggestion about the effect of evolving on 
>>Vland: that the Vilani immune system was affected negatively by 290,000 
>>years of isolation in an almost disease-free environment. The other minor 
>>races could have had their own disease vectors. Propably less than the 
>>Terrans  --  one might compare them to the meso-americans  --  but enough 
>>to keep their immune system at least partly on its toes.
> 
>And I argue that there would have been enough contacts with subject races
>that had diseases that they would have had a immune response amongst the 
>more adventurous elements of their society that went back at least to the
>founding of the Ziru Sirka.

OK, that makes sense. Let's assume that the Vilani did have an immune system 
>equivalent to heir minor human subjects. That leaves several possibilities:

The other minor races that the Terrans encountered had similar problems. It
just wasn't mentioned specifically, since the Vilani constituted by far the
most of the victims. Or, the Vilani was suceptible to something carried by
the Terrans and the rest wasn't. Pure chance, nothing else.

>>But the situation had NEVER happened before. Never before had many
>>thousand disease carriers been introduced to populated Vilani planets. 
>>At most some Vilani diplomats had been infected while living on another 
>>planet.
> 
>And, as I have pointed out, unless you are claiming the Terrans did this
>sort of thing deliberately and neglected the Vilani and the potential 
>public health problems completely, this makes no sense.

I still question your basic assumption that the Terran TL 13 medical
knowledge was a magic wand that could cure everything. Propably they
could deal with most of the problems. But it only takes one areosol-
transmitted fatal disease with an incubation period of a few weeks per
planet. The Terrans must have been carrying hundreds or thousands of
goodies. Remember, the diseases they carried had had a number of decades
to adapt to TL 13 countermeasures. You do realize that there are germs
around today that remedies only one TL below our present technology are
useless against? (Germs that have adapted to those remedies, I mean). And 
that's diseases that can affect us today. Just think about all the germs 
we never bother with because we've adapted to them.

>The reason we are given for the Estigaribbia coup is that he and
>the Terran Navy were concerned with the poor attitude (alleged) of
>the Terran government towards the Vilani. Why do this if you want 
>to kill off massive numbers anyway?

Aside from the point that what Estigaribba _said_ he wanted may not be
what he wanted, I agree that if the Terrans could have stopped these
epidemics, then they _propably_ would. Presumably they did stop a lot
of them. How could we tell? The ones they couldn't tell would obviously
get all the attention. You don't see many front page stories about the
absence of polio in Denmark today.

>>But what if vaccination proves not to work on the Vilani? Remember,
>>Andrew is postulating an impaired Vilani immume system.
> 
>And is there any evidence for this? 

Not unless you count the massive die-offs in the Plague of Duskir ;-)
This is a theory proposed to explain why the Vilani medical technology
was so poor.

>After all, the Vilani are still around *despite* the fact that Terran 
>diseases are now (it is reasonable to assume) rampant throughout
>"known space."

That one is no problem. I think "Rats&Cats" even give the explanation. The
Vilani that are alive in 1100 are descended from those Vilani whose
immume systems were a bit stronger than those of those who died.
 
>>What if we assume that due to an impaired immune system, most diseases 
>>are lethal to Vilani? If that was the case, vaccination would not develop
>>as a measure. The only possible measure, actually, would be quarantine
>>and destruction of the host. OTOH, diseases would very rarely achieve
>>epidemic proportions, because they would kill the infected people before 
>>they could pass it on.
> 
>Then what about the Vilani today? If they have developed an immunity in
>only a thousand years or so when in the previous several thousand years 
>of the ZS they developed none,

First off, I'll accept that the Vilani were propably as strong as the other
minor races (though, as I said, they _could_ have had a special
suceptibility). That said, if only a percentage of the Vilani were strong
enough to survive the onslaught of the Terran diseases, then every Vilani
alive in 1100 are descended from the minority with the stronger immune
systems. Plus, Duskir found a cure for the plague, remember?

>it seems more than likely that they should *still* be lethally affected
>by terran diseases -- *regardless* of any medical intervention.

It seems absolutely unlikely that they would still be lethally affected
by Terran diseases. If that was the case, they wouldn't be here any more.

>>You are assuming that the standard Terran measures would work on the
>>Vilani. Am I wrong or are most vaccines actually weakened diseases? 
>>You are still ignoring Andrew's very cogent point that the Vilani were 
>>less able to deal with diseases than the Terrans.
>
>Yes. Many are in fact *dead* diseases that still stimulate an immune
response.

In Terrans ;-).

>Or, as I understand it, you can actually transfer the immune factors from
>one human to another (or will be able to with reasonably likely advances 
>in medical science). And, of course, *antibiotics* will handle all the 
>bacteria caused diseases 

No, they will handle those bacteria that have not adapted to the anti-
biotica. Diseases adapt too. That is something you seem to forget.

>and, we can assume, that there are *antivirals* available by the
>time of the Terran Confed. 

But, again, we know that even the TL 15 remedies of the 3rd Imperium are
not 100% effective. Why would you assume that TL 13 remedies would be?

>>>Where is it stated in "canon" that the Vilani have a high rate of
>>>negative reactions?
>>
>>Nowhere, as far as I know. It is a good stab at explaining a bit of 
>>canon, though.
> 
>Yep, but assuming that it's all part of a Vilani "nationalist" version of
>the "stab in the back" of Hitler and the Nazis is equally valid.

It is certainly valid, but is it necessary? If both views are valid, then
why not use the one that is closest to PPM?

>>Or maybe just lacking one vital bit. A bit that wasn't important until
>>they encountered the Terrans. That would account for all Phillip's problems
>>with the present explanation. Even if the Vilani did have a reasonable
>>way of dealing with some diseases and quarantine measures to deal with
>>others, the Plague of Duskir would still work if it was a single, specific
>
>But this would not reduce the effectiveness of antbiotics -- and probably
>have no effect on antibacterials, either.

Again, you assume that TL 13 antibiotics and anti-bacterials are 100%
effective against all possible diseases. Actually, they are most likely
not to work against vira and bacteria that are not dangerous to the
Terrans (the one the Terrans carry about without even thinking about it). 
And those are exactly the ones the PoD story claims killed off all those 
Vilani.



      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1778
***********************************
Traveller-digest    Wednesday, September 3 1997    Volume 1997 : Number 1779



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Keanou
Re: Keanou
CSC vehicles and putting them in an FTP
Re: FFS Equations Web page
Re: Sea Bears
Re: K'Kree and the Hresh
Re: K'Kree and the Hresh
Commerce and Trade in T4
The Gateway Book - Replies to Various Comments (LONG)
Re: CSC vehicles and putting them in an FTP
Mexi-Dogs
Re: Task Resolution
Re: Task Resolution
Re: The Gateway Book - Replies to Various Comments (LONG)
Re: CSC vehicles and putting them in an FTP
Re: Task Resolution
Re: Emperors and Accidents (was Conspiracy Theories)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 03 Sep 1997 09:09:43 -0600
From: Glenn Hoppe <starcity@sk.sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: Keanou

Hans Rancke-Madsen wrote:

> Glenn Hoppe replied:
> 
> >2. Typographic Error.
> 
> Not in three different publications, surely?

Why not?

It probably was miskeyed in one, and the mistake perpetuated itself,
because the following publications copied the data from the first.

That never stopped anyone from inventing keen reasons why the digit
changed, tho'. ;->

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 08:36:35 -0700
From: Chris Griffen <cgriffen@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: Keanou

>>The planet Keanou (Spinward Marches 2411) is a problem to me. In _Spinward
>>Marches_, _Twilight's Peak_, and _The Traveller Adventure_ its hydrographics
>>score is 0, indicating that around 1105 it had a maximum of 4% free-standing
>>water. But in _Spinward Marches Campaign_ and the _Regency Sourcebook_ it
>>has a hydrographics score of 2, indicating that in 1110 (and 1202) it had a
>>minimum of 15% free-standing water.
>>
>>Can anybody suggests how a planet can go from 4 to 15% open water in 5 years
>>or less?
>
>Maybe the IISS made a superficial Survey of the planet and noted neither
>free standing water nor icecaps but a more thorough check (by a hapless
>misjumper searching  for water to make fuel etc) revealed that beneath a
>thin surface of sand/dust deposited by very heavy volcanism lay a thick
>layer of ice around the poles.
>
>The UWP was updated, and IISS promised the emperor to take a long hard look
>at their quality control practices regarding survey data (and then ignoring
>the issue wholeheartedly of course).
>
>Some smugglers might have bribed the IISS to keep the 0% hyd figure so that
>nobody would suspect them for using the planet as a refuelling place during
>their smuggling runs.
>
>
>/Anders Backman

Perhaps in some sort of global cataclysm, an ice asteroid collided with the
world and cracked open some subterranean aquifers.

Best,

Chris Griffen

===================================================
Keeper of the Flame. Traveller player since 1980.

http://www.best.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: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 18:07:37 +0200
From: Pedro Arnal Puente <parnal@lander.es>
Subject: CSC vehicles and putting them in an FTP

Hi all

I'm an avid reader of the TML and FTPmaster for a new growing FTP site for
a spanish roleplaying mailing list.

Last days i have been reading all the CSC new vehicles and enjoyed them
quite a lot and would like to ask the vehicle designers...

Could i put your vehicles (stating your name and e-mail adress) in TXT
files on the FTP server?

The FTP and the mailing list are maintained with no commercial interest of
any kind in the Public University of Navarra.


...Vaale, aceptamos Win95 como algo util, pero no te lleves el scatergories

*Saludos Mercenarios. Pedro Arnal Puente*
*Internet: parnal@lander.es**************
*http://www.lander.es/%7Eparnal/*********

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 03 Sep 1997 08:02:10 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: FFS Equations Web page

At 11:28 PM 9/2/97 +0000, you wrote:
>I have just posted the preliminary version of a web page with 'fixed' 
>FFS equations. Comments and the inevitable flames awaited with 
>interest! Please note, the equations are displayed as GIF files. Each 
>is approx 2K long so the page will take a while to load.
>
>http://www.vectis.demon.co.uk/traveller/FFSEquations.html
>
>Let me know what you think.

Very nice!

Doug.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 03 Sep 1997 08:06:58 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Sea Bears

At 03:28 PM 9/3/97 +0200, you wrote:
>Douglas E. Berry writes:
>
>>Perhaps the thought patterns of Sea Bears was soothing/erotic/interesting
>>to the Nobles, and they brought them with them as pets. 
>
>I like that idea. The only trouble with it is that if they were popular
>Zhodani pets, then the Imperials would presumably know that and it should
>have been mentioned in the orginal article. But it's a neat idea and I'm 
>tempted to go with it anyway.

Maybe pets was too strong a word.. perhaps they just let them loose, and
enjoyed them the way we enjoy listening to songbirds.
- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 3 Sep 97 18:20 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: K'Kree and the Hresh

In-Reply-To: <199709010224.VAA08102@brain.ames.net>

Andrew,

> A question: What would the K'Kree think of the Hresh?

Nice, but they couldn't eat a whole one.
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 3 Sep 97 18:20 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: K'Kree and the Hresh

In-Reply-To: <199709010224.VAA08102@brain.ames.net>

Andrew,

> A question: What would the K'Kree think of the Hresh?

Nice, but they couldn't eat a whole one.
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 2 Sep 1997 23:48:22 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Commerce and Trade in T4

Marc,

When you get to the economics part of T4, please can you re-instate the
clear difference between freight and cargo that MT had. The T4 rules are a
mess, spread over several chapters, and have nothing clear like the MT
tables. I had to revert back to MT to make the merchant campaign I'm using
work okay.

As a side question - how do we handwave the 1000Cr/dt freight charge
remaining constant from M0 to M1105. Does the Imperium have no inflation,
or are we just going to ignore this...

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"Omnia Mutantur Nihil Interit"  -  Sandman 'The Wake'
"Everything Changes, but nothing is truly lost" 

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 03 Sep 1997 19:04:51 +0100
From: Andy Lilly <a.s.lilly@nortel.co.uk>
Subject: The Gateway Book - Replies to Various Comments (LONG)

Hi all,

I've not been able to respond to the list for several weeks now because of
the amount of work involved leading up to European GEN CON (EGC), for which
I organised the Traveller stand. More of that in a later e-mail. I thought I
ought to respond to a few points brought up by some people about the
adventure Gateway, recently released by IG.

This is not meant as 'blame mail', but I think it only appropriate to defend
the authors (myself and David Burden) with regard to some of the accusations
made on the list.

BACKGROUND

As you may know, Gateway forms the second part of the campaign adventure
which began with Long Way Home. The two books are based on the original
adventure The Long Way Home which we (BITS/CORE) released at EGC last year,
in combination with the UK launch of T4. LWH and Gateway each have an
additional adventure (compared to TLWH) and were updated to match First
Survey data where this would not unduly compromise the adventures.

WHY PEOPLE MIGHT DITCH T4

:-) <- Smiley! Yes, this entire e-mail is my attempt at a humorous reply.
However, it's late and I'm tired so it will probably get a bit defensive at
first, then aggressive in the middle and sorrowful at the end. You have been
warned...

>...I've had a chance to look through Gateway and, frankly, I'm bloody disgusted...
>The level of proofreading displayed in the damn thing displays nothing less than
> *either* contempt for the buying public *or* a complete lack of even the most
> minimal level of ability.

I'll try to explain what's happened...

>...repeated mis-spellings of <Scout Corpss>...

I can't explain this one. This was a misprunt in the original TLWH and was
somehow missed by the Word 6.0 spell-checker that I used. I did request that
IG spell-check it to ensure US spelling was used, so I really don't
understand how this got missed by either of us. For the sake of it, I'll
take the blame for that one.

>The map on pg. #14...they have managed to leave out the greyscale 1meter hexgrid...
>...I mean, for ghu's sake, they got it *right* in "The Long Way Home",
>after all! How bloody difficult would it have been to copy the d*mn file
>across *intact*?

Remarkably difficult, actually. The original TLWH was prepared in Microsloth
Word 2.0 with all the pictures drawn in Freelance for Windows v2.0 then
'printed' to an EPS file and these EPS files were included in the Word
master document. Since I printed the masters, then took these to the
printers directly for reproduction, I knew at every stage of the process
just what the final copy would look like. That didn't stop me leaving some
bloopers in TLWH, but it did mean things like the cock-ups in LWH and
Gateway didn't happen.

For some reason (limited IG computing facilities, file corruption over
e-mail or whatever), IG was unable to accept the original text and diagrams
in any form, whether I sent the Word text and/or EPS files as a whole or
separately. The final solution, much to my amazement, was that I had to send
the text as plain text (with no formatting), and used Freelance to export
the pictures as Adobe Illustrator (which loses any shaded polygons, changes
some colours, etc.). Naturally, I was worried that the formatting of the
text would take a huge amount of time, but IG assured me that they had
access to 1+ of the four free copies of TLWH that I sent them last year, and
thus that they could lay it out from the plain text (which they seemed to
manage without any great problems). However, despite my telling them about
the effects of exporting to AI, IG don't seem to have corrected the graphics
(I believe, for example, for the missing grid lines, all that was needed is
to get the file into AI, select the 'invisible' lines - which are still in
the graphic but have been set to the background colour or somesuch - and
then set them to a visible colour such that they reappeared in the picture).

>Lacomp's Villa map on page #24 has the same problem.

Same reason.

>The Brelan Generation Ship map is in the "Marks of Weakness" Chapter (page #32)
>when it *should* be in "The Ark" (page #35) ... and the "Duel Area" map that is
>on page #35 should be on page #32. This is inexcusably sloppy.

I was a bit worried about this, so I went back to the original text and
checked - I correctly indicated in each case in the text which diagram
should go where, for example within the Maernon text for the duel, the file
reads:

START QUOTE:
Hex edges marked as cliffs take 2 whole turns to climb up or down; such
obvious targets can be seen by almost anyone who cares to look!

///INSERT THE DUEL AREA MAP SOMEWHERE ABOUT HERE (SC7P1.AI)

A character with Athletics skill may attempt the following task:
END QUOTE

As you can see, I've given the AI file name to ensure there is no confusion
(for reference, my submissions to IG usually use ///comment to put in
special comments such as diagrams, read out boxes, tables, etc.).

>And the hex-grid that *should* be on "The Duel" is left off, making the goddamn
>map virtually useless as printed, and a complete waste of space.

>The "Overlapped Ships" map on page #46 also lacks the 1m sub grid...

>The Detailed System Data Maps lack the dashed line showing the system plane...

>The Planetary Maps are distorted...

See earlier EPS/AI comments.

>I mean, didn't *ANYBODY* even bother to *check* the proof copies?
>Or didn't they even bother to *DO* bloody proofs?

We authors hand over the manuscript and cross our fingers. We don't see any
proofs, galleys, whatever. Naturally, it's a little costly for IG to fax
them all over to me as I'm in the UK, and posting them would take too long,
as these things are normally done to a tight deadline. However, given that
they had TLWH to hand to check directly with the original printed pictures...

>It's not as if it's difficult to do all this -- the "complexity" of the layout
>is such that it could be done with any of the major Wordprocessing programs...

As noted earlier, TLWH was published using Word 2.0 and imported EPS files.
(The cover was prepared in Adobe Illustrator with help from Photoshop.)

>Since any decent Printer can handle the files that these programs
>can create these days...

Not round here! In my (limited) experience, UK printers typically only
handle Mac stuff and usually Adobe, Pagemaker, etc. A Word 6 diskette would
be diddley-squat use to them.

THE DREADED VIRUS

Phillip McGregor then discussed a lot of "canon" stuff about the Vilani, the
Interstellar War and the "Plague of Duskir", wondering how we could justify
the adventure "Children of a Future Age" in "Gateway". Various people have
since expressed their opinions on the subject.

The answer is simple. It's an adventure. It was written so that it could be
played as an interesting adventure where the players could use their
advanced technology to save an entire world. The 'virus' was designed to
give them a time limit, so that they did not feel that they had months to
play with while just a few people died slowly. The 'virus' was supposed to
be cured with a bit of adventuring, some thought from the players, requiring
interaction with the local community, questioning the ethics of whether they
should even stick around or just run for it, etc. Had David and I wanted an
adventure that tied in 100% with our current SEVERELY LIMITED AND PROBABLY
FLAWED understanding of biology, genetics and scientific work, then we could
have generated a rather boring adventure which required people with PhDs to
understand it, and in which the process of making a cure took place over a
few decades - wow, that would be real fun for your players, eh?

I'm afraid that given the common "canon" acceptance of totally unproven
sci-fi stuff from psionics to gravitic thrusters and jump drives in
Traveller, I really can't accept any criticism (even from our more learned
TML readership) on creating an adventure several THOUSAND years in the
future which involves lifeforms, genetics, etc. that we would not currently
consider possible.

>*either* we must regard Gateway as contradicting
>the canon-heads *or* we must regard the interpretation of the canon-heads
>as being wrong. There is really no middle course.

This adventure in Gateway is not meant to *define* or *challenge* any
previous "canon", thus I shall not comment on the subsequent discussion on
various "canon" data on plagues and interstellar wars which are, as far as I
am concerned, totally unrelated. If it pleases someone then I'll claim that
we knew about all these problems when we planned the adventure and that
there is a single genetic abnormality in the humans on this world due to
eating local animals and vegetation which has made this virus able to kill
them. Waffle waffle hand-wave, hand-wave. Sorry, but that's as far as I can
take such a discussion seriously given all the other stuff that is just
'accepted' as Traveller canon.

>...the most lethal biowar agent experimented with was botulism (botulinal
>toxin A to be precise if memory serves). It does have a lethality of close to
>100%...

Thanks Andy - as was pointed out by others, this was a deliberately
engineered killer virus, created in an easy-to-disperse form, with a very
rapid effect, thus I don't really see why the spread should not wipe out the
major population centres as per the adventure.

>At 1-9 million people, they probably don't need an SST (assuming that the SST
>could land in the middle of the jungle in question).

At TL9, they ought to have more in space, and with the T4 tech rules they
probably ought to have extensive grav vehicles, but they don't - that's just
because I don't interpret tech in the stuck-in-concrete way that some people
seem to.

>Canon has nothing to do with it, it sounds like the *adventure* is
>broken badly.

Yes and no. Yes, canon has nothing to do with it. No, the adventure is not
broken. As per my comments above, the adventure is quite acceptable, whether
you just think up some reasons for how the virus was geneered, dispersed,
etc., or whether you simply accept that it's an adventure and supposed to be
fun to play, rather than being a dry technical paper for New Scientist. At
this point I put on my flame-proof suit and announce that given the success
levels of BITS demos and tournaments to date, I think I *know* fairly well
what makes a good adventure.

>The adventure premise isn't *quite* garbage. It's just really, *really*
>unlikely. The sort of thing thing that happens one world out of a
>million.

Once humankind has visited one million worlds in the next few thousand
years, I'll take that statistic seriously. The chance of this happening
could be 1 in 1 or 1 in 10^1000000000000000000000 - until we get out there
and actually meet aliens (if they exist) and find worlds with Earth-like
ecologies (if they exist) I find it hard to accept scientific judgement on
whether or not such a scenario is likely. The universe is vast, and no
matter how righteously we declare our current knowledge of the universe to
be perfect or nearly so, I believe that in the future we will always look
back and say "How could we have been that stupid?"

There were other quotes including the words "stupid", "ridiculous", etc.
Anyone care to make a 100% certain declaration of the entire process by
which BSE acts (or doesn't?) on humans? Whether or not it's really a threat?
Is it actually some other non-cattle-related illness which we have as yet to
identify, which just 'happens' to look like BSE? This is a current-day
affliction which has been studied for several years, the mechanics of which
has amazed scientists... and yet people on this list are still declaring
that we can say with 100% certainty what will or won't happen on an alien
world in a few thousand years time? Get serious!

As regards this whole problem, the issue was summarised rather well by one
of the posters:

>...But since we don't know how yet, all I can do is handwave...

Then again...

>No, there *is* a third alternative. You even mentioned it yourself
>above. It's possible (even likely, given your description) that the
>adventure is badly written and the author was an idiot. :-)

Look, I saw the smiley and realised this wasn't a personal attack. Humorous
retort mode: I'm definitely an idiot, although I wouldn't like to comment
for David. My brain is too packed full of Traveller, AD&D, C++ programming
and other useless stuff to leave much room for things like knowing exactly
how a virus from an alien planet in a few thousand years time is likely to
affect the human populace there...

GOOD NEWS

I have discovered a few extra copies of TLWH which I thought were damaged
(and thus unsuitable for sale) but are actually in A-ok condition. So, if
anyone is particularly interested in purchasing a copy of this hideously
errata-prone adventure, with its ridiculous plot ideas, then please e-mail
me directly. I leave any final comment on its suitability as an adventure to
those who have played it, rather than to anyone who has analysed it as a
scientific text...

Andy :-)

P.S. 101 Rendezvous and 101 Travellers are out. 101 Lifeforms will be out
soon. All hand-published by BITS, so I get to check what they look like at
every stage in the process. All 101 books come with loads of useful
Traveller material for people that referee or play Traveller and enjoy the
game. Also guaranteed to have at least one deliberate piece of errata in
every book to satisfy those people that just like picking holes in things,
rather than doing anything constructive towards promoting Traveller.

P.P.S. This entire e-mail should be read out loud to a large audience in a
humorous and sarcastic tone, interspersed with belly laughter, to indicate
its good nature. Despite this proviso, no doubt someone will think it's a
personal attack on them.

P.P.P.S. The very first cock-up on the LWH printing which I noticed (but
which no-one has commented on) and which I told IG to correct for Gateway
(but which they didn't) was that the deckplan on the back page was squashed
vertically, such that the 'square' grid came out as rectangles... (noise of
author strangling self in despair).

P.P.P.P.S. I'll take the blame for LWH and Gateway ONCE I GET THE CHEQUE...

P.P.P.P.P.S. I'll take the blame for the Vargr section of the Aliens book
ONCE I GET THE CONTRACT AND THE CHEQUE (hint, hint).

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 03 Sep 1997 20:31:37 +0100
From: Simon Early <sre@taz.compulink.co.uk>
Subject: Re: CSC vehicles and putting them in an FTP

I have been collecting the CSC designs into one large TXT file that can 
be browsed using a "multiple notes in one file" program (for Win 95/NT) 
written by my flatmate.

The outline view on the left shows the title of each design.  When you 
click on a title the right pane is filled with the appropriate text.  
Combained with the Find text facility, you can track down your 
favourite CSC design in no time.

If I ever get round to writing a CSC program for Win 95 users, I will 
probably use this interface to store all of the designs created by 
the user (and those posted to the TML) in one convenient database.

Rob's CSC program sounds like a good reason to get a Mac!

Simon

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 15:45:17 -0400
From: "Glenn Crawford" <glennc@nelvana.com>
Subject: Mexi-Dogs

Thus Spaketh Eris-thustra
I understand the Aztecs just *loved* chiuhuas..deep fried, of course.

Nope. They generally boiled meat and then sliced it fine. But the main use
of Chihuahuias was a foot warmer for nobles, and as a watch animal. (They
just have to be alert enough to warn a human, they do not have to deal with
the threat)

I imagine the Joes think of the sea bear the way we think of sea lions and
real bears: they look cute and cuddly but in real life they are
foul-tempered and smelly. In other words, they make bad cartoons about them
and stuffed toys

BTW, in the Journal, there is an alien race that sounds and acts like a
venom spitting chicken. The creature is described as "fowl-tempered"

Picture the aliens from _Aliens_ attacking Sigourney going b'gawk, b'gawk
and bobbing their heads like a 7' chicken

This is almost as funny as the Ogres from Alien Archives that carry around
buckets of garbage. The text says "they sometimes wrap their tentacles
around the waste"

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 03 Sep 1997 17:03:14 -0400
From: Bill Rutherford <worj@topgun.cinecom.com>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

At 06:23 AM 9/3/97 EST, you wrote:
>Attached.
>
>
>
>
>Attachment Converted: "TRAV41~11.TXT"
>

Who posted this?  (Remember - I'm the one who doesn't receive routing info
w/my msgs!)

Tx!





Bill Rutherford
worj@topgun.cinecom.com

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 03 Sep 1997 17:03:05 -0400
From: Bill Rutherford <worj@topgun.cinecom.com>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

Does this mean that the 2nd Task War is over and we're all veterans of it?
;^)

>
>> OK, this is my last post.  
>> [More stuff where Kevin posts insults deleted.]
>
>
>No problem, Darren.
>
>Kenneth.
>





Bill Rutherford
worj@topgun.cinecom.com

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 03 Sep 1997 15:23:33 -0700
From: Scott Ellsworth <Scott_Ellsworth@alumni.hmc.edu>
Subject: Re: The Gateway Book - Replies to Various Comments (LONG)

At 07:04 PM 9/3/97 +0100, Andy Lilly wrote:
...
>LWH and Gateway each have an
>additional adventure (compared to TLWH) and were updated to match First
>Survey data where this would not unduly compromise the adventures.
>
>WHY PEOPLE MIGHT DITCH T4

Hope you do not think I am dissing you to terribly, here, but I just have
to respond.

In a high tech milieu, the world generation procedure, which produces lots
and lots of worlds that need high tech colonization, is adequate.

In T4, where most people are well below TL9, it sucks.  (Note: since the ZS
was  at TL11, and they were purposely keeping part of that tech a secret,
the tech at the time had to average TL9 or 10, and it likely had been that
way for centuries.  As a result, if the tech had not dropped significantly
below the ZS tech of 9 or 10, it would not have been a long night.)

I have a proposal in another thread about how to fix world gen.  Part of
this comes from assumptions - with likely 2-5 worlds in a system to select
from for colonization, one might select the ones that support life.  Thus,
I assume that more than 50% of the worlds in the universe support life
without technology.  This makes it easier to write adventures.

Because you had to work with FS data, you ended up holding an entire
scenario on a world that Chirpers likely could not live on.  Kisa Sa is not
a happy place for either Chirpers or humans.  My players just jumped next
door, and are now puzzling out how the high temperature makes sense.

This problem follows you through the entire series of adventures -
explaining why there is anything on a given godforsaken rock is pretty hard
to do, and blows the adventure almost immediately.  At least for my
players.  This is not unique to TLWH, as it has happened whenever I let
them land on a random planet.

...

>For some reason (limited IG computing facilities, file corruption over
>e-mail or whatever), IG was unable to accept the original text and diagrams
>in any form, whether I sent the Word text and/or EPS files as a whole or
>separately.

But it is their goddamn job to know what they can take, and plain text with
paste up is labor intensive and prone to error!

(Scott is held down by big, brawny folks until he clams down...)

Sorry, I am back.  IG just HAS to take the view that customers are going to
stop buying products if they all have glaring typos.  Or have such glaring
problems that the products need personal guides printed by the authors.

I can tell you that I am leaving the pre order plan if the next product has
a single typo I spot within two minutes of first opening it.

...

>>I mean, didn't *ANYBODY* even bother to *check* the proof copies?
>>Or didn't they even bother to *DO* bloody proofs?
>
>We authors hand over the manuscript and cross our fingers. We don't see any
>proofs, galleys, whatever. Naturally, it's a little costly for IG to fax
>them all over to me as I'm in the UK, and posting them would take too long,
>as these things are normally done to a tight deadline. However, given that
>they had TLWH to hand to check directly with the original printed pictures...

Yeppers.  And I want to know why the original authors did not have galleys.
 We sell software, and when we spend 10K on a thousand copies of our
manual, we get a proof.  We check it out, and we send a copy to those who
need it before we print and ship it.

Yes, it might have cost them $100 to get a copy to you.  It might have been
worth it.

>P.P.P.S. The very first cock-up on the LWH printing which I noticed (but
>which no-one has commented on) and which I told IG to correct for Gateway
>(but which they didn't) was that the deckplan on the back page was squashed
>vertically, such that the 'square' grid came out as rectangles... (noise of
>author strangling self in despair).

I noticed it immediately.  Sigh, I had hoped they would fix it for Gateway,
but they are IG.  What can we do?

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: Wed, 03 Sep 1997 15:46:48 -0700
From: Scott Ellsworth <Scott_Ellsworth@alumni.hmc.edu>
Subject: Re: CSC vehicles and putting them in an FTP

At 08:31 PM 9/3/97 +0100, Simon Early wrote:
...
>Rob's CSC program sounds like a good reason to get a Mac!

I found his Metator program another one.  Now if someone will just do
something similar to his CSC program, or SAL, for FF&S...

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, 04 Sep 1997 00:52:37 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

On Wed, 03 Sep 1997 17:03:14 -0400, Bill Rutherford wrote:

> Who posted this?  (Remember - I'm the one who doesn't receive routing info
> w/my msgs!)

Marc did.




James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 20:21:42 -0500 (CDT)
From: Joseph "Chepe" Lockett <jlockett@io.com>
Subject: Re: Emperors and Accidents (was Conspiracy Theories)

Quoth scharlto@ifsna.com:
> the Imperia have had a long enough history to have seen an Emperor
> killed in a Grav Vehicle accident, or even in a starship accident.

Yep.  CT Supplement 8, in the original Emperors' List:

"Martin III:  Second issue of Anguistus (a preceding infant died in
childhood).  Born 289, proclaimed emperor in 365, died in an air/raft
accident in 456 at the age of 167, having outlived his only issue.  In
memory of this deceased son, the title Martin IV was never used by an
emperor."

As for accidents of other natures, "Margaret I: Oldest issue of Zhakirov.
Born 684, proclaimed empress in 688, died in a tunnel collapse without
issue in 736.  Margaret established the Solomani Autonomous Region in
704."

I now expect to hear all about how Martin's death was the result of a plot
by the anti-Georgian Illuminati, concerned over his family's long project
of genetic self-improvement....  :-)

- ----------------------------*------------------------*------------------------
 Joseph L. "Chepe" Lockett  |"Nullum magnum ingenium | GURPS fan, Amiga user,
http://www.io.com/~jlockett | sine mixtura dementiae | Shakespearean scholar,
  Email: jlockett@io.com    | fuit." -- Seneca       | actor and director.

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1779
***********************************
Traveller-digest    Thursday, September 4 1997    Volume 1997 : Number 1780



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: The Gateway Book - Replies to Various Comments (LONG)
Re: Battle dress turtles  (was RE: Traveller-digest V1997 #1764)
Re: The Gateway Book - Replies to Various Comments (LONG)
Re: 
Re: TL 16 (was Re: RoM/Terra TL)
Re: The Gateway Book - Replies to Various Comments (LONG)
Re: Sea Bears
Re: Battle dress turtles  (was RE: Traveller-digest V1997 #1764)
Re: Keanou
Re: TL 16 (was Re: RoM/Terra TL)
Plague of Duskir etc.
Andy Lilly, Proofreading and Virus

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 21:24:12 -0500 (CDT)
From: jatkins6@ix.netcom.com (John Atkinson)
Subject: Re: The Gateway Book - Replies to Various Comments (LONG)

You wrote: 

>Sorry, I am back.  IG just HAS to take the view that customers are going to
>stop buying products if they all have glaring typos.  Or have such 

I'm new to this list (as well as to Traveller), so excuse me if this 
has been said before.

But the Emperor's Arsenal is so buggy, it's (almost) unusable (as well 
as being devoid of the sort of details needed to reverse-engineer the 
things-a past time I've taken up with vehicles mentioned in Striker II).

And what is up with the combat system?  The range system, I don't 
understand.  I direct you to the TL8 section of Emperor's Arsenal.  
Cannon, Heavy, and Cannon, Medium have identical ranges, VLong.  
Missle, AT-8 has. . .Short range?  Real life, the TOW II outranges 
Soviet tank guns (3,750m to 3,000m).  I just don't get it.

I've gotten a hold of some TNE stuff and I have to think that the 
combat system, at least, was a bit better thought out (if hideously 
complex, at least in theory).

John M. Atkinson

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 18:30:09 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Battle dress turtles  (was RE: Traveller-digest V1997 #1764)

In mail you write:

> On Monday, September 01, 1997 20:00, Leonard Erickson wrote:
>> Well, tankers look at things differently. A lot of them are willing to
>> give up the flexibility for the protection at least when they have to
>> get out of the tank in hostile territory. :-)

<snip>

> Back to the original quote...  If you're IN A TANK in hostile territory, 
> what in the stars would coerce you to get OUT?

Easy. You've reached your "campsite". Drake has several stories set in
Vietname during the war. They all involve tankers. And they do make the
point that you *have* to get out of the tank *sometime*.

(another possibility: You've thrown a tread, and have to put it back on..)

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 21:21:29 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: The Gateway Book - Replies to Various Comments (LONG)

In mail you write:

> In a high tech milieu, the world generation procedure, which produces lots
> and lots of worlds that need high tech colonization, is adequate.
>
> In T4, where most people are well below TL9, it sucks.

You have to consider that the universe doesn't exist solely for the
benefit of humans. Or even for critters that like similar conditions.

I rather *like* the fact that you get worlds humans don't like. 

Also, the tech level required to handle *any* world generated by the
standard system is about TL *4*. And that's for the extreme cases like
vacuum or exotic atmospheres.

Consider that the Inuit (Eskimos) live happily in an extreme
environment using TL-0 equipment. Any world with at least thin
atmosphere is probably inhabitable with minimal tech. Of course, it'd
require selecting the appropriate colonists, and accepting some losses.

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 03 Sep 1997 22:29:48 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Re: 

Hans Rancke-Madsen wrote

> I wrote:
> >>The planet Keanou (Spinward Marches 2411) is a problem to me. In _Spinward
> >>Marches_, _Twilight's Peak_, and _The Traveller Adventure_ its hydrographics
> >>score is 0, indicating that around 1105 it had a maximum of 4% free-standing
> >>water. But in _Spinward Marches Campaign_ and the _Regency Sourcebook_ it
> >>has a hydrographics score of 2, indicating that in 1110 (and 1202) it had a
> >>minimum of 15% free-standing water.
> >>
> >>Can anybody suggests how a planet can go from 4 to 15% open water in 5 years
> >>or less?

> Peter Newman replied:

> >here is an explanation.
> >
> >[...]
> 
> WOW! Talk about quick work! I've done a few WBH writeups myself, but this
> is amazing. Good work. Just two question: Did you make sure the temperature
> works out all right for a hydrographics score of 2 in 1202? ;-)

This planets year is 257 years long.  Its surface temperature will not
change very much in the 92 year period between 1110 and 1202 and
therefore it should still have a hydro rating of 2.  My assumptions were
that the planet will have a hydrographics of 2 about half the time and a
hydrographics of 0 the other half of the time, therefor it should go
back to a 0 hydrographics in about 1234. The orbital eccentricity of
this planet will cause its temperature to change by +6 degrees at its
closest approach to its sun and -6 degrees at its farthest from it. 
This is a change of approximately 0.047 degrees per year.  My
assumptions were that given the temperature differential on the planets
hot face the sea is constantly boiling away at its northern edge and
reforming as ice at its southern edge.  During most of this planets year
the sea is in one of two stable conditions. 

I am specifically _not_ bothering to list exactly how far north into the
planets hot face this glacier is because the calculations necessary for
figuring out what latitude will have what equilibrium temperature would
be extremely rigourous.  Since I am not bothering with a planetary map
it is sufficient to say that the glacier is at the point where the air
temperature is just below freezing.

The sea is either small (no bigger than 1% of the planets surface area
(about 3.7 x 10^6 sq km)) with a vast glacier of about the same size
hundreds of meters thick on its southern edge or large (about 18% of the
planets surface area (about 6.7 x 10^7 sq km)) with a still very large
glacier that has shrunk 90% in size.  

> And will
> a glazier covering 4% of the surface supply enough water to cover an
> additional 16% of the surface? 

Since the basin the sea flows into averages only 10 to 15 meters deep
(the sea bottom is probably a lava flow accounting for its flat nature)
is probably  sand the glacier was hundreds of meters thick it _would_
contain enough water.  At its maximum extent this glacier encircles the
planet and is over 150km wide (making for a lovely view from space). 
When it melts away to its minimum size it is still over 90 km wide and
dozens of meters thick.  I should also not that given how rapidly it is
melting and refreezing it would technically be a field of snow and ice
rather than a glacier per se.

I had fun designing this planet.  If anyone out there has a web site for
planets I would not mind seeing my version of Keanou available there.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 03 Sep 1997 22:46:25 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Re: TL 16 (was Re: RoM/Terra TL)

Brody  Dunn wrote

>  Peter Newman wrote:

> > Well actually they could have had a High Common TL of 15 but had a
> Heavy
> > Military TL of 14.  Then a Tl 15 planet would be producing TL 14
> > troops.  I am not saying they were TL 15 but (using World Builders
> > Handbook) a world can quite easily have military forces at a TL
> > different from their High Common Tech Level, Terra could have been one
> > of these planets.
> 
> It does seem unlikely to me that Military Tech on most worlds would ever
> lag behind common TL.  After all on Terra (now) a good portion of our
> advances have come from Military based research (I include the space
> program here as well)

In WBH the Heavy Military TL is based on the Land Transport TL (I guess
you have to have cars before you make tanks).  The Land Transport TL is,
in turn, based on Energy TL (cars must need motors).  Given the tables
as they are written almost 20% of all planets will have a Heavy Military
Tl that is inferior to their High Common TL. The technological pattern
we see on Earth may well be atypical because Earth is a balkanized world
and most planets in the Imperium are not.  Non balkanized worlds do not
face as immediate a military threat and therefore they presumably devote
a smaller percentage of their efforts toward military technological
advances. (If the APC's you have now are good enough to machine your
rioting citizens why spend money making bettter tanks :)  )

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 04 Sep 1997 07:10:12 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: The Gateway Book - Replies to Various Comments (LONG)

On Wed, 3 Sep 1997 21:24:12 -0500 (CDT), John Atkinson wrote:

> You wrote: 
> 
> >Sorry, I am back.  IG just HAS to take the view that customers are  going to
> >stop buying products if they all have glaring typos.  Or have such 
> 
> I'm new to this list (as well as to Traveller), so excuse me if this 
> has been said before.
> 
> But the Emperor's Arsenal is so buggy, it's (almost) unusable (as well 
> as being devoid of the sort of details needed to reverse-engineer the 
> things-a past time I've taken up with vehicles mentioned in Striker 
> II).

You will have to be more specific regarding "bugs" in EA.  Of all the
T4 releases, EA has the least.  You are correct about lacking
information for reverse engineering, though, but why would you want
to?  Just use the weapon design sequence in either FF&S2 or 3G3 and
make up your own.

> And what is up with the combat system?  The range system, I don't 
> understand.  I direct you to the TL8 section of Emperor's Arsenal.  
> Cannon, Heavy, and Cannon, Medium have identical ranges, VLong.  
> Missle, AT-8 has. . .Short range?  Real life, the TOW II outranges 
> Soviet tank guns (3,750m to 3,000m).  I just don't get it.

Identical ranges are a result of the ever steeper range categories
(ie: the further out you go, the larger each category becomes).  If
you want to be specific regarding exactly how many metres each weapon
is good out to, your out of luck.

On that note, just because two weapons are listed as medium and heavy
does not necessarily mean that the latter will have a longer range.
The heavy may do more damage or simply stand up in combat longer (eg:
the traditional designations of LMGs and MMGs don't really mean that
two such weapons have different maximum ranges-- a MMG is just
designed for sustained fire in heavy combat situations compared to a
LMG).

*All* weapons have a maximum range of 1,500m in the T4 rulebook,
unless specifically stated otherwise (see below).  Many have felt that
this is a silly rule.  Emperor's Arsenal includes an optional rule on
page 10 that limits weapons to more realistic ranges (although it
still isn't perfect).

And if you read more carefully, the "Missile, Light AA-8" and
"Missile, AT-8" on page 56 both list maximum ranges in their write ups
of subregional (10 km) and regional (30 km), respectively.  Missile
velocities are also listed so you can calculate flight times.  The
"Short" range designation for these weapons (as well as the LAAW-8) is
for the basic T4 rules regarding "Aiming".


James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 13:14:02 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Sea Bears

Douglas E. Berry writes:
>>I like that idea. The only trouble with it is that if they were popular
>>Zhodani pets, then the Imperials would presumably know that and it should
>>have been mentioned in the orginal article. But it's a neat idea and I'm 
>>tempted to go with it anyway.
> 
>Maybe pets was too strong a word.. perhaps they just let them loose, and
>enjoyed them the way we enjoy listening to songbirds.

I failed to express the problem properly. The situation I envisage is this:
Around -1100 the Zhodani government decides that the time has come to begin
work on preparing another part of the galaxy for eventual settlement and 
sets up a project that encompasses parts of Lianic, Massina, Chronor, and
Jewell (presumably the Zhodani do not use the Imperial map conventions ;-).
As part of the project, which is expected to run for several centuries 
before settlers are actually move in, research teams are sent to every
planet with a compatible ecosphere in the area, including Thengo. On one
of these planets they discover a new, previously unknown, animal, the Sea
Bear. Some time later, the decide to spread this animal out across all the
planets in the project area. This is not some animal they bring with them
from their own world, an animal that has entered their society the way for
example dogs have entered our society, an animal they know all about. It's 
an animal that they have just encountered; yet in a few decades they know
enough about it to decide to seed it all over the place. It seems to me
that either there is nothing special about it, in which case it was
presumably SOP for such a project to cross-seed dozens of animals from
each world to a lot of others, or there is something really special about
the Sea Bears. My problem was that I couldn't think of a plausible reason 
why anyone would cross-seed species promisciously, and I couldn't think of 
a good special attribute for the Sea Bears.


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 06:25:29 -0500 (CDT)
From: jatkins6@ix.netcom.com (John Atkinson)
Subject: Re: Battle dress turtles  (was RE: Traveller-digest V1997 #1764)

You wrote: 

>> Back to the original quote...  If you're IN A TANK in hostile 
territory, 
>> what in the stars would coerce you to get OUT?
>
>Easy. You've reached your "campsite". Drake has several stories set in
>Vietname during the war. They all involve tankers. And they do make 
the
>point that you *have* to get out of the tank *sometime*.
>
>(another possibility: You've thrown a tread, and have to put it back 
on..)

How do you throw a tread on a grav tank, and if you're advanced enough 
to have battle armor, why would you want anything but a grav tank?

John M. Atkinson

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 13:26:02 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Keanou

Eris Reddoch writes:
>>Interesting problem.  Suppose that the 4% didn't include polar ice caps,
>>and in five years the planet heated up enough to melt some of the polar
>>ice caps.  
> 
>That should be possible, but anything that could cause that big a change
>would have had *very* unpleasant effects on the biosphere.
> 
>If the star is a variable, it might have flared.

Again I've failed to express my problem properly. I did think of the melting
icecap theory, but I simply don't know if 1) Enough water to cover an 
additional 11% of the surface can be tied up in a 4% icecap and 2) how much
energy does it take to melt that much ice (ie. is it plausible that the
change could take place over only 5 years)? I believe that the amount of
energy needed to effect planetary scale changes is non-trivial ;-)

      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 06:29:23 -0500 (CDT)
From: jatkins6@ix.netcom.com (John Atkinson)
Subject: Re: TL 16 (was Re: RoM/Terra TL)

You wrote: 

>> It does seem unlikely to me that Military Tech on most worlds would ever
>> lag behind common TL.  After all on Terra (now) a good portion of our
>> advances have come from Military based research (I include the space
>> program here as well)

>Tl that is inferior to their High Common TL. The technological pattern
>we see on Earth may well be atypical because Earth is a balkanized 
world

Keep in mind on Earth only the US and NATO allies have armies that are 
anywhere near the planet's tech level.  Third-world countries have TL 5 
to 6 armies in many cases.  

And the computors in US equipment is generally a couple computor 
generations behind the state of the art in other areas.

John M. Atkinson

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 04 Sep 1997 11:47:17 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: Plague of Duskir etc.

On Wed, 3 Sep 1997 11:22:50 -0400, you wrote:

>Subject: Re: Plague of Duskir
>
>Phillip McGregor writes:
>>>From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
>>>Phillip and Andrew, could you please keep your sentenses a bit shorter?
>>>It enhances readability immensely.
>> 
>>I'll try.
>
>You're failing. ;-)
> 
>>>Phillip, is 'canon-head' meant to be derogatory? It sounds a bit that way.
>> 
>>Yes, but in the *friendliest* possible way <grin>! And, yes, you equally
>>well call *me* an "anti-canon-head" -- feel free!
>
>Why? Is there some hidden merit in not caring for keeping the background
>coherent? Or do you (as I suspect) mean something different than I read
>when you use the words 'canon-head' and 'anti-canon-head'? To me there is
>something good in sticking to canon merely from the increased likelihood
>that I can use material created by someone else that is likewise sticking
>to canon (or 'previously published material' (PPM for short), if you don't
>like the term 'canon'.

Its a sign of a bad Aussie habit of making fun of those who takes things too
seriously (which I will freely admit to being guilty of myself sometimes -- and
probably on this very issue) ... just think of it as being a particularly bad
pun!

>>And this means that the effectiveness of any Biowar or Plague such as PoD
>>would be much reduced. 
>
>True. Any one plague is extremely unlikely to spread from one world to
>another. You do realize that as written up, the Plague of Duskir is not
>one particular plague, but a whole lot of different ones crrried to the
>Vilani worlds by the Terrans?

Yes, I certainly do! And I do not personally (for what that's worth) think it
makes any difference at all to the flaws that I perceive in the
"canon-supporters" ("canon-heads") arguments. For reasons that you will no doubt
comment on below.

>>And it also means that the Vilani would be aware that
>>such a thing was a problem and would know how to handle it.
>
>They would know how to guard against its spread (always assuming, of
>course, that the incubation period didn't run into years). Not much 
>help when dealing with a massive number of carriers.

I can't think of too many really majorly lethal diseases that have incubation
times in years -- BDE/CJD is one that comes to mind, but it seems to have an
infection rate of perhaps 1 per million population and takes (depending on
whether you have CJD or BSE) between 10-15 and fifty or more years to become a
problem. The only way that I can see your "solution" being an actual solution is
if you are prepared to ditch the idea of the vulnerability of the Vilani immune
system (which I realise isn't yours, but you *have* supported it) as it would
seem to contradict it -- to me, at least.
 
>>But, as I said, the *Terrans* would have the deep knowledge of biology
>>and medical science ... and, unless we are going to accept that the
>>Terrans either didn't care *or* deliberately set out to "thin" the Vilani 
>>populace, they would have found it very easy to deal with the likelihood 
>>of disease spreading.  
>
>There's another possibility. That either the Terran state-of-the-art
>medical knowledge was not capable of dealing with these problems (which
>would indicate that the theory of one particular, hitherto unknown,
>problem present in Vilani and not in Terrans were responsible) or the
>really state-of-the-art technology was not available. Perhaps TL 13
>medical technology requires Really Big Machines. Machinery that just
>wasn't available at first on even TL 11 planets.

This seems to be drawing a *very* long bow -- I mean, how different *are* the
Vilani? Are they a different species? This is not the case as we know that they
were capable of interbreeding with other minor human races and with Terrans. We
can deal with diseases in Terran organisms here and now even if they aren't
human ... that's what Veterinarians do all the time. Yet here you are suggesting
that Vilani have some unique difference that makes them not only susceptible to
Terran diseases *but* also makes them somehow able to transform the diseases
into a form that cannot be treated with standard treatments (antibiotics and
ativirals) ... after all, the bacteria and viruses are the problem, and *they*
haven't changed. It's only that the Vilani are more vulnerable to the diseases
- -- not that they make the diseases different!
 
>>No, but it passes on the *idea* of diseases, and the *medical* (rather 
>>than just quarantine) means of dealing with them. Which is (from my point 
>>of view) what the whole argument is about!
>
>I'm getting into this discussion late, so bear with me. What medical
>techniques other than quarantine that would infallibly allow the Vilani
>to survive any disease whatsoever brought by the Terrans are you talking
>about?

Quarantine is big on the list. Historical indications also indicate that a lot
of people who died from "disease" in classical pre-modern "plagues" did not
actually die of the *disease*, but of complications ... more often than not they
died for want of simple basic care ... provision of sustenance, warmth etc. This
could be provided by suitably protected Vilani -- they would (as I think I have
established) have enough knowledge to have antiseptic procedures and to be able
to provide protective suits (or even simple gauze masks) that would eliminate or
reduce the chance of the carers becoming infected. But quarantine is always a
good one, as, indeed, historically has been the case, in and of itself.

>>And the longstanding existence of the AAB means that Biowar and PoD would
>>be quickly recognised for what they were and the AAB data could be used
>>to jump start medical research. Consider the benefits of computers here 
>>-- and the inevitable need for veterinary medicine for local food animals 
>>where kept on a commercial basis.
>
>You're postulating that the ability to recognize a problem gives the
>ability to solve it in short order. There's plenty of AIDS and cancer
>researchers that won't agree with you.

Well, the Vilani *do* have computers. And they *have* had them for a *very* long
time. And if people start dying we can reasonahly assume that basic folk
knowledge of such unusual (but not rare) medical problems will be enough to
trigger database searches.

>>I'm simply indicating that the ability to deal with these sorts of
>>diseases does not require a huge understanding of how they work.
>
>Not if you have a Terran immune system, no ;-)
> 
>>But we know that the Vilani *did* occupy lots of planets that were =
>>already inhabited.
>
>Lots? Some, yes, but where do you get the 'lots'? The one I can recall
>off-hand is Sylea (and there I believe they moved the Syleans onto
>far-off reservations, didn't they? There may have been a good reason for
>that.

One of the planets in Gateway was inhanbited by Droyne and Vilani in the same
buildings during the Ziru Sirka. There are other examples implied in much of the
material that we have about the Ziru Sirka ... the method of classifying races
as "minor" or "major" (whether human or not) goes back to the ZS, for a start.
There are also cases that are mentioned here and there like the one mentioned
above, but I really have no intention of tracking them down. We have two now,
and there are (by reasonable extrapolation) many more ... "lots."

>>We know that they *did* allow "subject" races to move around.
>
>What are you referring to here? 

Non-Vilani.

>>And I argue that there would have been enough contacts with subject races
>>that had diseases that they would have had a immune response amongst the 
>>more adventurous elements of their society that went back at least to the
>>founding of the Ziru Sirka.
>
>OK, that makes sense. Let's assume that the Vilani did have an immune system 
>>equivalent to heir minor human subjects. That leaves several possibilities:
>
>The other minor races that the Terrans encountered had similar problems. It
>just wasn't mentioned specifically, since the Vilani constituted by far the
>most of the victims. Or, the Vilani was suceptible to something carried by
>the Terrans and the rest wasn't. Pure chance, nothing else.

Which still doesn't explain how Terran treatments don't work -- unless you
believe that the Terrans deliberately set out to promote and spread the
Plague(s). This strikes against all logic -- we are not talking a Hitlerian
"lebensraum" that means the hypothetical Terran settlers need huge ranches or
farms (assuming that they would even farm them without massive automation), we
are talking a situation where the settlers will want the trappings of a high
tech society ... and this means that they *need* the skilled workforce (or
trainable workforce) that the locals represent. Given that they will also need
the locals as a market for the goods that their factories will produce in order
to introduce higher tech items, if that is the route they choose to go.

Even the Spanish, not noted for the way in which they treated the Mesoamerican
indians, made *huge* attempts to protect their valuable indian *slaves* against
outbreaks of Smallpox ... paying for the importation of what passed for "high
tech" and "state of the art" medical treatment and practitioners when it
occurred. So it is completely unreasonable to assume that the Terrans would not
and, as we have already seen, regardless of the vulnerability (or lack of
vulnerability) of the Vilani immune system, antiobiotics and antivirals will
still kill the diseases they will be exposed to. And killed bacteria or virus
vaccines will work to protect them by boosting their immune responses -- and
there are indications that recent developments will enable immunosuppressant
factors can be passed on as well (and, given cloning is possible at the TLs in
question, it seems likely they would have solved these problems in the game Time
Line). 

>>>But the situation had NEVER happened before. Never before had many
>>>thousand disease carriers been introduced to populated Vilani planets. 
>>>At most some Vilani diplomats had been infected while living on another 
>>>planet.
>> 
>>And, as I have pointed out, unless you are claiming the Terrans did this
>>sort of thing deliberately and neglected the Vilani and the potential 
>>public health problems completely, this makes no sense.
>
>I still question your basic assumption that the Terran TL 13 medical
>knowledge was a magic wand that could cure everything. Propably they
>could deal with most of the problems. But it only takes one areosol-
>transmitted fatal disease with an incubation period of a few weeks per
>planet. The Terrans must have been carrying hundreds or thousands of

These antibiotics and antivirals are hardly difficult to produce -- and local
tech could easily be converted. And are you arguing that the Terrans had no idea
of the problem or its magnitude -- we *are* talking a military coup based
government, and the military are notorious for having contingency plans for
*everything*. And they had fought the Vilani and occupied their worlds for over
a century -- so the problem would not have been new or unknown. Occam's razor
means that either the Terrans deliberately spread the disease(s) (and, as I
explained above, this doesn't make economic sense) or that they were so vastly
incompetent that they could not possibly have beaten the Vilani (or anybody
else) -- or, more likely, that there never was any Plague of Duskir, and that it
was really a Vilani "stab in the back" excuse.

>goodies. Remember, the diseases they carried had had a number of decades
>to adapt to TL 13 countermeasures. You do realize that there are germs
>around today that remedies only one TL below our present technology are
>useless against? (Germs that have adapted to those remedies, I mean). And 
>that's diseases that can affect us today. Just think about all the germs 
>we never bother with because we've adapted to them.

But they are still affected by antibiotics -- even e coli (present in the gut
even of Vilani) can be killed off by antibiotics ... and, where this is done,
the "victim" has to have e coli reintroduced into their GI tract. And e coli is
not a killer -- it is a symbiote in many ways.

>>The reason we are given for the Estigaribbia coup is that he and
>>the Terran Navy were concerned with the poor attitude (alleged) of
>>the Terran government towards the Vilani. Why do this if you want 
>>to kill off massive numbers anyway?
>
>Aside from the point that what Estigaribba _said_ he wanted may not be
>what he wanted, I agree that if the Terrans could have stopped these
>epidemics, then they _propably_ would. Presumably they did stop a lot
>of them. How could we tell? The ones they couldn't tell would obviously
>get all the attention. You don't see many front page stories about the
>absence of polio in Denmark today.

Then you agree that the problem is (or has probably been) blown out of all
proportion by Vilani apologists -- in their variation of the "stab in the back"
theory. "We would have beaten the dastardly Terrans except that they didn't play
fair, and used diseases to deliberately destroy our society." ???

>>>But what if vaccination proves not to work on the Vilani? Remember,
>>>Andrew is postulating an impaired Vilani immume system.
>> 
>>And is there any evidence for this? 
>
>Not unless you count the massive die-offs in the Plague of Duskir ;-)
>This is a theory proposed to explain why the Vilani medical technology
>was so poor.

But we have no "evidence" of massive die offs, and a lot of circumstantial
evidence to show why it would be unlikely to have occurred at all.

>>After all, the Vilani are still around *despite* the fact that Terran 
>>diseases are now (it is reasonable to assume) rampant throughout
>>"known space."
>
>That one is no problem. I think "Rats&Cats" even give the explanation. The
>Vilani that are alive in 1100 are descended from those Vilani whose
>immume systems were a bit stronger than those of those who died.

But even then they should be much more vulnerable to Terran diseases than any
Terran given the arguments you are supporting re their weakened immune system.
And there is and never has been any indication that this is the case.
 
>>>What if we assume that due to an impaired immune system, most diseases 
>>>are lethal to Vilani? If that was the case, vaccination would not develop
>>>as a measure. The only possible measure, actually, would be quarantine
>>>and destruction of the host. OTOH, diseases would very rarely achieve
>>>epidemic proportions, because they would kill the infected people before 
>>>they could pass it on.
>> 
>>Then what about the Vilani today? If they have developed an immunity in
>>only a thousand years or so when in the previous several thousand years 
>>of the ZS they developed none,
>
>First off, I'll accept that the Vilani were propably as strong as the other
>minor races (though, as I said, they _could_ have had a special
>suceptibility). That said, if only a percentage of the Vilani were strong
>enough to survive the onslaught of the Terran diseases, then every Vilani
>alive in 1100 are descended from the minority with the stronger immune
>systems. Plus, Duskir found a cure for the plague, remember?

But remember that it wasn't *one* plague! As for the rest, see above.

>>Yes. Many are in fact *dead* diseases that still stimulate an immune
>response.
>
>In Terrans ;-).
>
>>Or, as I understand it, you can actually transfer the immune factors from
>>one human to another (or will be able to with reasonably likely advances 
>>in medical science). And, of course, *antibiotics* will handle all the 
>>bacteria caused diseases 
>
>No, they will handle those bacteria that have not adapted to the anti-
>biotica. Diseases adapt too. That is something you seem to forget.

This seems obtuse -- the Terrans in the game and the medical science that is
given does not have any problem handling diseases. We know that there is ongoing
research into antibiotics and antivirals for the very reasons that you suggest
- -- and that a variant of the disease that was (a) lethal enough to be rendered
immune to antibiotics ... i.e. it had to be treated with antibiotics will (b) be
lethal to Terrans also, perhaps not *as* lethal, but lethal nonetheless
(otherwise they would not have used antibiotics against it in the first place).

Ergo, if the Plague of Duskir really existed, it would have caused massive,
though lesser, deaths amongst Terrans as well. And there is no evidence of this
- -- and Terran loyalists would have indicated this if it was so as a counter to
the Vilani "stab in the back" claims.

>>and, we can assume, that there are *antivirals* available by the
>>time of the Terran Confed. 
>
>But, again, we know that even the TL 15 remedies of the 3rd Imperium are
>not 100% effective. Why would you assume that TL 13 remedies would be?

How do we know? Well, by the absence of special rules that indicate that any
character is vulnerable to a disease based on some sort of racial
susceptibility. The absence of any rules or data that indicate that the Sylean
Confed ever suffered from huge debilitatingly lethal plagues. Seems pretty
conclusive to me.

>>Yep, but assuming that it's all part of a Vilani "nationalist" version of
>>the "stab in the back" of Hitler and the Nazis is equally valid.
>
>It is certainly valid, but is it necessary? If both views are valid, then
>why not use the one that is closest to PPM?

But I would argue that the version I suggest does not contradict the PPM either,
and is more reasonable and believable to boot. I guess we'll just have to agree
to disagree on that one!

Phil

- ---------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU)
Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)
Designer, Standard Role Playing (PGD)

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 04 Sep 1997 12:03:28 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: Andy Lilly, Proofreading and Virus

On Wed, 3 Sep 1997 21:43:23 -0400, you wrote:

<Much stuff on reason for Proofing or lack thereof deleted>

Andy, I'm not blaming *you* in any way, shape, or form -- in fact, I think I
said that originally. I *am* blaming IG. I don't care how limited their
computing resources, there is no excuse for the stuff ups that they perpetrated
*EXCEPT* that it was their first effort and they were learning. How many
projects have they stuffed up so far? And the excuse that the original (now
defunct) IG group was the problem is long since passed its use by date. They
seem, as I said, either to hold us all in contempt *or* to have not a single
clue. Take your pick.

I've had bad experiences with publishers, too (don't get me started over FGU),
but all of them have been professional in the area that counts ... the
proofreading and overall quality of their end product. IG doesn't even come
close -- and its been over a year.

As for cost, well, I'm negotiating a deal for a large supplement for a
reasonably newly reprinted game system and the publisher (US) has called by
three times, for in excess of an hour each time, by 'phone to discuss various
aspects of the project. Now, they are (as far as I can tell) a much smaller op
than IG, yet they will undoubtedly write it off as a business expense. How broke
is IG that they couldn't afford to fax the proofs *given* that they were having
problems with them!

Even FASA, years ago, when I was doing Rigger Black Book, offered to mail proofs
to me for final checking -- but I pointed out the delay built in because of my
location (3 weeks, minimum) and I said I was happy to trust them (as they were
obviously capable).

I just don't see that IG has any excuse any more.

>THE DREADED VIRUS
>
>Phillip McGregor then discussed a lot of "canon" stuff about the Vilani, the
>Interstellar War and the "Plague of Duskir", wondering how we could justify
>the adventure "Children of a Future Age" in "Gateway". Various people have
>since expressed their opinions on the subject.

>The answer is simple. It's an adventure. It was written so that it could be
>played as an interesting adventure where the players could use their
>advanced technology to save an entire world. The 'virus' was designed to
>give them a time limit, so that they did not feel that they had months to
>play with while just a few people died slowly. The 'virus' was supposed to
>be cured with a bit of adventuring, some thought from the players, requiring
>interaction with the local community, questioning the ethics of whether they
>should even stick around or just run for it, etc. Had David and I wanted an
>adventure that tied in 100% with our current SEVERELY LIMITED AND PROBABLY
>FLAWED understanding of biology, genetics and scientific work, then we could
>have generated a rather boring adventure which required people with PhDs to
>understand it, and in which the process of making a cure took place over a
>few decades - wow, that would be real fun for your players, eh?

I accept that the reason for the virus is as you say -- and I had figured it out
before I posted my initial comments on the Virus -- and it is valid as far as it
goes ... its just that it causes so many problems!

<snip>
>>No, there *is* a third alternative. You even mentioned it yourself
>>above. It's possible (even likely, given your description) that the
>>adventure is badly written and the author was an idiot. :-)

This wasn't my comment!

Phil

- ---------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU)
Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)
Designer, Standard Role Playing (PGD)

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1780
***********************************
Traveller-digest    Thursday, September 4 1997    Volume 1997 : Number 1781



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: The Gateway Book - Replies to Various Comments (LONG)
Re: The Gateway Book - Replies to Various Comments (LONG)
Twisted FFS2 design: Han Solo's pistol
Tech Levels
Re: Plague of Duskir etc.
Re: Battle dress turtles  (was RE: Traveller-digest V1997 #1764)
Re: Andy Lilly, Proofreading and Virus
Re: Battle dress turtles  (was RE: Traveller-digest V1997 #1764)
Skills vs Stats
Re: Alternaties (B5, ME, House, .pdf)  (was RE: Tactical Action Combat
Re: Commerce and Trade in T4
The Imperial Credit: What's It Worth?
Commerce and Trade in T4
RE: Commerce and Trade in T4
RE: Tech Levels
Re: Keanou
Sea Bears
Late response: Re: With Sympathy
A scenario idea:
It's Heeere.... [GURPS Traveller]
Traveller Curse

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 08:05:34 -0500 (CDT)
From: jatkins6@ix.netcom.com (John Atkinson)
Subject: Re: The Gateway Book - Replies to Various Comments (LONG)

You wrote: 

>The heavy may do more damage or simply stand up in combat longer (eg:
>the traditional designations of LMGs and MMGs don't really mean that
>two such weapons have different maximum ranges-- a MMG is just
>designed for sustained fire in heavy combat situations compared to a
>LMG).

eep! Forgot to include this. . .

M249 SAW range = 600m vs point, 800m vs area.
M60 MG range = 1,100 (600m grazing)

In T4 terms, correct.

John M. Atkinson

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 08:01:10 -0500 (CDT)
From: jatkins6@ix.netcom.com (John Atkinson)
Subject: Re: The Gateway Book - Replies to Various Comments (LONG)

You wrote: 

>You will have to be more specific regarding "bugs" in EA.  Of all the
>T4 releases, EA has the least.  You are correct about lacking

As far as flat typos, having reread, I have to agree.  Most of my 
original impressions were based on screwy range readings.  My 
favorite--TL 6.  Rifle, Recoiless-6  Range V.Short.  Again, TL 6 LAAW-6 
Range Short.  Nobody is going to tell me a Super Bazooka (that's what 
it looks like and what the text describes) is going to outperform even 
a WWII German 75mmL10 recoiless rifle at any range whatsoever.  And if 
TL-6 is 50s or 60s, the major recoilesses in use in the West were 
106mm.  And to make matters worse, the Missle, AT-6 also has V.short 
range.  So, if I've got a target 1km away, I'm better off shooting a 
Super Bazooka than a 106mm recoiless rifle _or_ an AT-3 Sagger.  Not in 
Real Life. . . 

>On that note, just because two weapons are listed as medium and heavy
>does not necessarily mean that the latter will have a longer range.

Yeah, but a Rheimetall 120mm main gun (TL-8 medium, I guess) has a max 
effective of 4 km (in ideal conditions.  By the book, optimum 
engagement range is 2-2.5 km).  An M198 towed 155mm howitzer (TL-8 
Heavy) has a max effective of. . . 24,000 meters.  Six times as far.  I 
don't care how coarse your range determination is, someone outta notice 
that!

>*All* weapons have a maximum range of 1,500m in the T4 rulebook,
>unless specifically stated otherwise (see below).  Many have felt that
>this is a silly rule.  Emperor's Arsenal includes an optional rule on
>page 10 that limits weapons to more realistic ranges (although it
>still isn't perfect).

Because then the Light Anti Armor Weapon 6 still greatly outperforms 
the Recoiless Rifle 6.  It now has a greater range!

John M. Atkinson
PS Sorry to be so finicky, but I'm a wargamer who got into Traveller 
because a friend was touting the wonderful weapons design sequence in 
TNE FF&S.  So I had him ship me a copy, said 'This is cool!  And it's 
the first non-hokeycomicbookstyle SF RPG I've found,' so I bought it.  
Along with the RCEG, Vampire Fleets, and the TNE rulebook.  All 
wonderful.  So then I shell out for T4, and find it's a better game on 
it's merits, but the combat resolution is bad. . . 

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 07:45:46 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: Twisted FFS2 design: Han Solo's pistol

Noodling about with FFS2 I came up with this, odd stretch of the rules.
Since the plasma gun section does _not_ give a minimum energy output or
size for a weapon, I decided to see what would happen if I made a very
small one. 0.01 MJ output, it has a short range of 10, and does 4 damage.
Pretty respectable for an insanely cheap, light weapon!

TL12 Plasma pistol

Firing Unit	0.04 kg		48 cr
Support Unit	0.04 kg		48 cr (note these two tables are the same, are
even labeled the same in the final draft of FFS2. Since I won't have FFS2
until atleast _next_ paycheck, that's what I'm working off. Typo or what?)
EPG action	0.001 kg	.006 cr
Cartriges	0.024 kg ea.	0.25 cr ea
Magazine 15 rd	0.152 kg	1.52 cr
fuel 100 rds	0.005 kg	(I'm positing a small cylinder of h2 gas, like a CO2 cartrige here)
Hollow Pistol grip
		0.1 kg		5 cr
____________________________________
Totals		2.05 kg		107 cr

Ok, ok at 2 kg it's a little heavy for a single pistol grip, But a forward
grip like a H&K MP-5 would do nicely. There are other refinements to be
made, like putting the gas supply into the magazine and providing only
enough for the round in the magazine. It'd make the magazines a little
more costly, but what the heck triple the cost of the magazine, and it's
still under 120 cr!

Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 10:55:43 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Tech Levels

A Theoretical Understanding of Tech Levels.

Technology levels reflect a consistent upward trend in the understanding of
the universe around us. The key word is understanding. There is a broad
progression of understanding on which people build their own comfort levels.
Someone at TL 0 has not yet made the intellectual leap which enables a basic
understanding that technology exists as a structure. Later in the
progression, it would be hard for a person to understand gears if he did not
understand wheels from a previous tech level.

Technology Levels can be segregated into Groups of three levels. In each
group, a cycle predominates=85 Theoretical, Practical, and Exploitation. The
initial level reflects the development of theoretical foundations of the
group; the next level reflects the practical implementation of the
theoretical, and a continued definition and refinement of the theoretical;
the final level reflects a maturing of the theory and a widespread adoption
of the technology in everyday life.

TECH LEVEL GROUPS
	TL Groups	Title
	-   0	NoTech=09
	1 -   3	VLoTech
	4 -   6	LoTech=09
	7 -   9	MidTech=09
	10 - 12	HiTech=09
	13 - 15	VHiTech
	16 - 18	UHiTech


TECH LEVELS
	TL	Description
	0	Primitive
	1	Bronze Age
	2	Iron Age
	3	C. 1400 to 1800
	4	C. 1831 to 1900
	5	C. 1930
	6	C. 1950
	7	C. 1970
	8	C. 1990
	9	C. 2010
	A	C. 2100
	B=09
	C=09
	D=09
	E=09
	F=09

For example, TL 1 indicates the beginnings of a technological culture; TL 2
is a refinement of those beginnings, and TL 3 reflects widespread
availability of the technology throughout society.

Other tech level cycles may be off sequence, or take longer or shorter than shown.

People on a world at a given tech level have that technology present in their
society and they consistently use it in their lives. A dentist at TL 8 could
see TL 10 destistry in the mouth of a patient, recognize it as advanced, and
even repair it (at TL 8 standards). But he would not have the theoretical
groundings to do TL 10 dentistry even after he saw it.


Marc Miller

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 11:31:44 -0500 (CDT)
From: jatkins6@ix.netcom.com (John Atkinson)
Subject: Re: Plague of Duskir etc.

You wrote: 

>I can't think of too many really majorly lethal diseases that have incubation
>times in years -- BDE/CJD is one that comes to mind, but it seems to have an

HIV/AIDS, off the top of my head. . . 7 years is roughly average for 
incubation time, but it varies from a year to ten or so. . . Of course, 
it's also difficult to transmit (very specific set of behaviors to do 
so) but then again if it's spread by starship crews, sailors are 
notorious for engaging in that set of behaviors, no?

John M. Atkinson

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 04 Sep 1997 16:46:40 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: Battle dress turtles  (was RE: Traveller-digest V1997 #1764)

On Thu, 4 Sep 1997 06:25:29 -0500 (CDT), John Atkinson wrote:

> You wrote: 
> 
> >> Back to the original quote...  If you're IN A TANK in hostile territory, 
> >> what in the stars would coerce you to get OUT?
> >
> >Easy. You've reached your "campsite". Drake has several stories set in
> >Vietname during the war. They all involve tankers. And they do make the
> >point that you *have* to get out of the tank *sometime*.
> >
> >(another possibility: You've thrown a tread, and have to put it back on..)
> 
> How do you throw a tread on a grav tank, and if you're advanced enough 
> to have battle armor, why would you want anything but a grav tank?
                        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

For the same reasons that military today do not rely on only armour to
fight a battle.  Tanks are expensive-- extremely so if you are going
to use them to hunt down your opponent's infantry.  You also cannot
hold ground with armour to any real extent-- the tanks are just too
easily spotted and eliminated.


James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 04 Sep 1997 16:57:22 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: Andy Lilly, Proofreading and Virus

On Thu, 04 Sep 1997 12:03:28 GMT, Phillip McGregor wrote:

[stuff regarding the quality of other companies' publications snipped]

> Even FASA, years ago, when I was doing Rigger Black Book, offered to mail proofs
> to me for final checking -- but I pointed out the delay built in because of my
> location (3 weeks, minimum) and I said I was happy to trust them (as they were
> obviously capable).

The RBB is _not_ a good comparison as a competently produced product, IMNSHO.

James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 20:33:04 +0300 (EET DST)
From: Matti Laakso <mlaakso@utu.fi>
Subject: Re: Battle dress turtles  (was RE: Traveller-digest V1997 #1764)

On Thu, 4 Sep 1997, John Atkinson wrote:

> How do you throw a tread on a grav tank, and if you're advanced enough 
> to have battle armor, why would you want anything but a grav tank?

IIRC T4 Emperor's Arsenal featured something called "BattlePods",
sort of fusion battledress/gravtank, with one soldier inside a 3-meter
long egg of superdense steel, bristling with FGMPs, lasers and missiles.
Despite T4s other shortcomings, I love the idea. Battledress is good for
TL 12-14, but gravitics is the way to enter TL 15+.


/RFXn			aka. Matti Laakso (mlaakso@utu.fi)

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 14:01:12 -0400 (EDT)
From: LrdRhys01@aol.com
Subject: Skills vs Stats

I have watched the debate concerning the relative importance of  skill level
and character stats. There is no easy solution that covers all situations.
What I do is assign a base skill level required for the task being attempted.
For every skill level the character is deficient, the difficulty increases by
1. For every 2 skill levels the character exceeds the required level the
difficulty decreases by 1. In my games I limit the bonus or penalty to 2
difficulty levels maximum. I find that this method increases the relative
importance of training over natural ability without being excessive. Mind you
it does require more work than just using the basic task system.    Note: I
do not use this system for combat tasks.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 4 Sep 97 18:05 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: Alternaties (B5, ME, House, .pdf)  (was RE: Tactical Action Combat

In-Reply-To: <01BCB70F.1AA45120.david@techrefuge.com>

David,

> I took your challenge, and perused, thoroughly, my copy of B5.  *shudder* 
>  Having NEVER watched the show, I'm somewhat intrigued

<falls off chair in shock>
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 21:26:05 +0100
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: Re: Commerce and Trade in T4

>As a side question - how do we handwave the 1000Cr/dt freight charge
>remaining constant from M0 to M1105. Does the Imperium have no inflation,
>or are we just going to ignore this...
>
>Dom

If the Cr is backed up with Iridium,lanthanum etc instead of being a paper
currency then there might be no inflation. Some economists suggest that in
the long run the only thing that causes inflation is governments printing
more money than they are worth because of budget inbalances.

Perhaps the imperium also has some automatic budget balancing laws. Who
knows maybe even politicians will learn something in the next thousand
years? ;)


/Anders Backman
Aniware AB
anders.backman@aniware.se

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 04 Sep 1997 14:31:44 -0600
From: Erwin Fritz <efritz@glja.com>
Subject: The Imperial Credit: What's It Worth?

Anders Backman wrote:
> 
> If the Cr is backed up with Iridium,lanthanum etc instead of being a paper
> currency then there might be no inflation. Some economists suggest that in
> the long run the only thing that causes inflation is governments printing
> more money than they are worth because of budget inbalances.
> 
> Perhaps the imperium also has some automatic budget balancing laws. Who
> knows maybe even politicians will learn something in the next thousand
> years? ;)

Now, I'm not an economist, so forgive me if this idea sounds stupid.
Here goes:

In the Trillion Credit Squadron days, there was a formula which calculated
how much a planetary government could raise in taxes per year. It was
based on population, government type and law level, IIRC.

Could the Emperor simply declare that this formula (or a similar one)
is the hard and fast rule for governments on how much money they can
"print" each year? Debts would simply be illegal; after a few decades
most world governments would figure out how to "save" for a rainy day.

With my limited understanding of how the money supply works in today's
economy, I realize that this represents a radical departure from 20th
century norms. However, would it work? 

Erwin

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 06:53:08 +0000 ()
From: kraehe@bakunin.hb.north.de (Michael Koehne)
Subject: Commerce and Trade in T4

Moin SD Mooney,

> When you get to the economics part of T4, please can you re-instate the
> clear difference between freight and cargo that MT had. The T4 rules are a
> mess, spread over several chapters, and have nothing clear like the MT
> tables. I had to revert back to MT to make the merchant campaign I'm using
> work okay.

	perhaps MM should read MT and TNE ;-)

> As a side question - how do we handwave the 1000Cr/dt freight charge
> remaining constant from M0 to M1105. Does the Imperium have no inflation,
> or are we just going to ignore this...

	There was an inflation because Sylean M0 1000Cr/dt where Tl12
	credits, while imperial M1100 1000Cr/dt was Tl15. 

	My handwaving : the Imperial Credit is a virtual value, defined
	by 1000Cr = 1dt per parsec.

By Michael
- -- 
	kraehe@bakunin.north.de			human.is-bremen.de/~kraehe
		  " ceterum censeo MSDOS esse delendam "

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 09:36:53 +1200
From: Brody  Dunn <brody@intersol.co.nz>
Subject: RE: Commerce and Trade in T4

Dom asked

> >As a side question - how do we handwave the 1000Cr/dt freight charge
> >remaining constant from M0 to M1105. Does the Imperium have no inflation,
> >or are we just going to ignore this...

and Anders Backman said

> If the Cr is backed up with Iridium,lanthanum etc instead of being a paper
> currency then there might be no inflation. Some economists suggest that in
> the long run the only thing that causes inflation is governments printing
> more money than they are worth because of budget inbalances.
> 
> Perhaps the imperium also has some automatic budget balancing laws. Who
> knows maybe even politicians will learn something in the next thousand
> years? ;)

Also as the Tech Level rises so does the value of the Imperial Credit
(at least according to various TL / Starport credit equivilences tables
provided over the years) so the TL12 ICr is worth less than the TL15
ICr.

Also as the basic rate of interest for starship loans is in the order of
3 percent this indicates a low to non-existant inflation rate
(Imperialwise at any rate - local planetary effects are left as an
exercise for the referee).

It also begs the question of what is a fair profit?  After all in a
competitive environment the price will tend to be as low as possible
accounting for a fair profit so what is fair given that inflation seems
to be a zero factor.

How much would a bank pay in interest for any amounts invested - if
anything?  Have to be less than 3 percent - so what is the incentive in
savings.  Or does the imperium cap ship loan rates due to the staggering
sums involved and the need to keep interstellar commerce moving?

Brody Dunn

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 09:53:53 +1200
From: Brody  Dunn <brody@intersol.co.nz>
Subject: RE: Tech Levels

Now this will be a can of worms.

I personally subscribe to the theory (or concept) that TL is a measure
of capability rather than understanding.  After all a very high tech
world could easily transport its knowledge to another world the drawback
being that the infrastructure to use that TL is not available.

If a world knows about high tech but cannot create it, it can be
virtually guaranteed that someone will import it ant great cost and sell
it at greater cost - so availabiity of TL10 dentistry would not be
limited to a TL10 world.  You have to buy the equipmenty and most of the
supplies from a TL10 world and be trained there but the things that TL10
worlds do in dentistry would ensure that that technology is imported to
other lower tech worlds.  It would cost but tooth bud regeneration at
TL10 would be available at any world with sufficeint resources to afford
it.

However, Tech Levels do put a cap on many of the large infrastructure
items and hence the large cost in increasing a worlds TL in books like
Pocket Empires.  The knowledge is the easy part, its getting the
machines to build the machines that extract the new wonder materiasl and
make the cool stuff that is really hard.

I really can't see the reason that worlds do not have enclaves of
imported High Tech, or that an enterprising individual doesn't import a
completely automated mini factory onto a world.  After all a colony must
import tech, so if an empty world can do it- so can a non-empty one.
Imported tech effects are of course related to the number of people
having to be serviced by that tech and the amount of it you import. A
moderate pop world would almost ceratinly be unable to import sufficient
high tech stuff to have any effect whereas a low pop world may be able
to make a jump in TL simply on imported Tech.

Brody Dunn

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 15:23:08 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Keanou

In mail you write:

> Again I've failed to express my problem properly. I did think of the melting
> icecap theory, but I simply don't know if 1) Enough water to cover an 
> additional 11% of the surface can be tied up in a 4% icecap and 2) how much
> energy does it take to melt that much ice (ie. is it plausible that the
> change could take place over only 5 years)? I believe that the amount of
> energy needed to effect planetary scale changes is non-trivial ;-)

That's why I went to the *other* extreme. The low figure is at closest
approach, when the max amount of water has been boiled/evaporated, and
the high figure is when the planet is farther out and the water has
condensed again.

Sure, it takes a fair amount of energy to evaporate that much water,
even if it's a shallow sea. And that energy is going to drive a weather
system that makes hurricanes seem like light breezes. 

I'm not sure, but I suspect that the boiling-to-freezing scenario will
cause even *worse* weather. Remember, it's water condensing out of the
atmosphere that provides the energy for hurricanes and typhoons. 

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 19:33:14 -0400 (EDT)
From: GypsyComet@aol.com
Subject: Sea Bears

 While the Zhodani may have planted Sea Bears all over the place, they may
not have done it for themselves. A significant percentage of the Consulate's
population is non-Zhodani, dominated by the Addaxur ("six-legged
carnivores"). The Sea Bear may be an addaxiform that is useful in some
way. Several ideas come to mind:
 -Pets (no other reason needed; consider the previously mentioned
  Chihuahuas)
 -Working Pet. Aquatic Sheepdog, fr'instance. This could be enhanced by
  a natural affinity for telepathic instruction (not the same as actually
  being psi-enhancers or resonators).
 -Extraordinary Adaptive. The Sea Bear may be highly adaptable to new
  environments, making it an important step in Zhdantiforming or
  Addaxiforming a world. It need not be immediately useful except to a
  developing ecology.
 -Food Source. Addaxur might eat _anything_. (see again Chihuahuas, the
  original Hot Dog).

 They could also be early Imperial for most of the same reasons. One amusing
thought is that they were all imported by ONE Ziru Sirka project. Some
slightly mad fellow wanted to make sure that there would be _something_
edible on these planets when the Vilani finally got there with serious
colonization efforts. The same sense of silliness could be applied to
some enterprising Vargr, who saw the spreading of his favorite pet
species as his version of "Kilroy was here" (ever heard of the Gunjj?
Graffiti artists extraordinaire from L. Neil Smith's Confederacy.)
The possibilities are vast.


GypsyComet

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 00:46:34 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Late response: Re: With Sympathy

Bruce wrote:

>	I was just on my way out to Euro Gencon 97 at Loughborough when I heard
>about this. I didn't have the appetite to go and play and also run a
>Traveller demo then, but when I arrived a few hours later I was glad I did go.
>
>	There were about 20 people playing a Traveller tournament in the morning,
>and later I ran a two hour demo for a small group who enjoyed my
>quickly-designed short adventure very much. That made the day much more
>bearable.

Bruce,

Speaking as one of the referees of the tournament, I didn't find out until
4.30pm that afternoon!

Wondered why some people were down.... Talk about gaming being an immersive thing!

Dom

NB Please can we take this off list as we're getting enough on the rest of
the media as it is...

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"Omnia Mutantur Nihil Interit"  -  Sandman 'The Wake'
"Everything Changes, but nothing is truly lost" 

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 01:05:52 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: A scenario idea:

SPOILER WARNING!
SPOILER WARNING!
SPOILER WARNING!
SPOILER WARNING!
SPOILER WARNING!
SPOILER WARNING!
SPOILER WARNING!
SPOILER WARNING!
SPOILER WARNING!
SPOILER WARNING!
SPOILER WARNING!
SPOILER WARNING!
SPOILER WARNING!
This scenario inspired by a certain SciFi file, initials EH!

Setting: CT Traveller,  a Depot, HRD on-site team.

The players are all called to a briefing room and ordered to procede (in a
fast boat) to one of the outer gas giants of the system, and perform an SAR
mission. No other details are given, except that an additional crew member
has been assigned and that they are to leave immediately.

On reaching the site, they detect an unidentified vessel with an Imperial
Transponder (military). This identifies it as a ship previously assumed to
be lost with all hands. The extra team member, a HRD engineer explains that
the ship was an experimental J7+ vessel, using gravitic technology to
exceed the J6 limit. It disappeared after its first jump was initiated 7
years before. The mission is to recover it...

The players board the ship and find evidence that the crew have murdered
themselves brutally, that the contragrav is still operational, and that the
new J-Drive is still powered. The drive distortion field causes severe
mental damage, (almost like a neural disruptor) and causes humans to freak
out and go psycotic. The crew boarding will attempt to destroy themselves
and their own ship in brutal and perverse ways. The HRD engineer (very mad
now) will set the drive to engage, and unless stopped by released the fore
section lifeboat will cause a massive mis-jump, and death.

____

I think you were all being a little harsh on Event Horizon - it has
Traveller potential....

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"Omnia Mutantur Nihil Interit"  -  Sandman 'The Wake'
"Everything Changes, but nothing is truly lost" 

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 04 Sep 1997 17:06:56 -0700
From: George Herbert <gherbert@crl.com>
Subject: It's Heeere.... [GURPS Traveller]

From: http://www.sjgames.com/ill/

>September 4, 1997: SJ Games Announces GURPS Traveller
>
> Steve Jackson Games is proud to announce that it has acquired the rights
> to create a GURPS version of the classic Traveller, the oldest and most
> popular outer-space roleplaying game ever. 
> 
> "This is something we and our fans have wanted for a long, long time,"
> Steve Jackson said. "I'm very happy to finally be able to do it,
> especially since we'll be working with the same people who made
> Traveller great in the first place." 
> 
> Long-time Traveller editor and writer Loren Wiseman will serve as
> Line Editor for the GURPS Traveller series of books and will write
> the first release.  "Loren and (Traveller original author) Marc Miller
> are the real deal," Managing Editor Scott Haring said. "With their help,
> we're going to do books that the die-hard Traveller fans will love." 
> 
> The license from Sweetpea Entertainment -- owners of Traveller after
> original publishers Game Designer's Workshop went out of business in 1995 --
> sets GURPS Traveller in an "alternate timeline" from the one currently
> being published by Imperium Games. Haring said, "In our timeline, Emperor
> Strephon doesn't get assassinated, and the `virus' that was the entire
> basis for Traveller: The New Era did not devastate the Imperium.
> Our timeline is a continuation of the original Traveller, though
> with Wiseman and Miller's help we'll be taking it in some interesting
> directions." 
> 
> The first GURPS Traveller volume will include a description of the
> basic Traveller gameworld, GURPS rules for characters, equipment and
> spacecraft of the Traveller universe, and conversion rules between the
> two systems. "We want players to be able to convert any Traveller material
> -- and there's a lot of it out there -- to GURPS right off the bat,
> and we want Traveller players to be able to play in our alternate timeline,"
> Haring said. 
> 
> The first GURPS Traveller release is tentatively scheduled for an early
> 1998 release. Scheduling for subsequent books in the series is yet to be
> determined.
> 
> -- Scott Haring 

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 10:03:34 +1000 (EST)
From: "D.Moodie" <dmoodie@st.nepean.uws.edu.au>
Subject: Traveller Curse

The Traveller Curse
- -------------------

The first time I saw T4 I thought, hey what's going on here, yet
another Traveller (Ok, so we hear nothing over here in Australia until the
book's in the store and I didn't have internet access a year ago). I
flicked through the book, got confused by the task system and laughed at
the basic combat system (Ok so I'm a TNE fan). when I found out about all
the errors, that convinced me to avoid, avoid, avoid.

I'd already suffered with MT errors (a beautiful system with an
equally beautiful task system just needing some consistency) and been a
little pissed by FF&S's plethora of errors but this was a joke.

Has T$R put a curse on Traveller or something? GDW's 3 attempts at 
Traveller produced 2 with plentiful errors, and now Imperium Games manages
to top this with more errors in the system so far than before %P

There is definitely a conspiracy going on here... does T$R run the
printers? Are they trying to push out Traveller with their pathetic D&D in
space Alternity ?)   

							'M.'D.Moodie

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1781
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Friday, September 5 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1782



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re:  Keanou, Commerce and Trade in T4
Re: Battle dress turtles  (was RE: Traveller-digest V1997 #1764)
Re: The Gateway Book - Replies to Various Comments (LONG)
Re: CSC vehicles and putting them in an FTP
Thoughts on the Plague of Duskir
GURPS Traveller announced....
Re: Sanity
Re: GURPS Traveller announced....
The politics of money (was RE: The Imperial Credit: What's It Worth?)
RE: Commerce and Trade in T4
RE: A scenario idea:
Re: Ship Missions
Re: It's Heeere.... [GURPS Traveller]
Re: GURPS Traveller announced....
Re: Battle dress turtles  (was RE: Traveller-digest V1997 #1764)
Re: Battle dress turtles  (was RE: Traveller-digest V1997
Re: GURPS Traveller

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 04 Sep 1997 17:55:52 +0800
From: Michael Bailey <mickb@opera.iinet.net.au>
Subject: Re:  Keanou, Commerce and Trade in T4

Re Keanou:

How 'bout a bombardment with ice asteroids as part of a
terraforming/colonisation project?



>As a side question - how do we handwave the 1000Cr/dt freight charge
>remaining constant from M0 to M1105. Does the Imperium have no inflation,
>or are we just going to ignore this...

How 'bout periods of inflation followed by periodical re-valuation of the
credit?

It's been used a number of times on Earth to cut those extra 0's off the
end of banknotes (Russia 1996 beng on example)....

Michael Bailey
mickb@opera.iinet.net.au
				
pillock-at-large and proud supporter of the Chelsea FC and Fremantle AFL
Clubs!

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 04 Sep 1997 17:51:00 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Battle dress turtles  (was RE: Traveller-digest V1997 #1764)

At 08:33 PM 9/4/97 +0300, you wrote:
>On Thu, 4 Sep 1997, John Atkinson wrote:
>
>> How do you throw a tread on a grav tank, and if you're advanced enough 
>> to have battle armor, why would you want anything but a grav tank?
>
>	IIRC T4 Emperor's Arsenal featured something called "BattlePods",
>sort of fusion battledress/gravtank, with one soldier inside a 3-meter
>long egg of superdense steel, bristling with FGMPs, lasers and missiles.
>Despite T4s other shortcomings, I love the idea. Battledress is good for
>TL 12-14, but gravitics is the way to enter TL 15+.

But you can't win "hearts and minds" from inside a battlepod.  Sure, the
assult Marines might use them as mini tanks, but I'd wager that the
majority of TL15 Marines will still being in "old fashioned" BD to take
advantage of having your arms avalible for work.

Battlepods would probably be used as Marine Cavalry, racing about the
battlefield providing shock effect at specific points, and reinforcing weak
spots.
- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 05 Sep 1997 01:43:03 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: The Gateway Book - Replies to Various Comments (LONG)

On Thu, 4 Sep 1997 08:01:10 -0500 (CDT), John Atkinson wrote:

> You wrote: 
> 
> >You will have to be more specific regarding "bugs" in EA.  Of all the
> >T4 releases, EA has the least.  You are correct about lacking
> 
> As far as flat typos, having reread, I have to agree.  Most of my 
> original impressions were based on screwy range readings.  My 
> favorite--TL 6.  Rifle, Recoiless-6  Range V.Short.  Again, TL 6 LAAW-6 
> Range Short.  Nobody is going to tell me a Super Bazooka (that's what 
> it looks like and what the text describes) is going to outperform even 
> a WWII German 75mmL10 recoiless rifle at any range whatsoever.  And if 
> TL-6 is 50s or 60s, the major recoilesses in use in the West were 
> 106mm.

Nowhere in EA is it stated that the specific Real World weapons you
describe are the one's EA has listed (you don't have to look any
further than the picture atop p. 32).  IMO, this is not a problem.  If
you want to recreate specific Real World weapons, but either 3G3 or
FF&S2.

And I wouldn't put too much faith in the artwork providing clues as to
each weapons' capabilities.  The Cannon, Very Heavy-6 looks like the
Paris gun, but does not possess the immense range of that historic
gun.  The text goes on to say that it is a *direct fire* weapon.  Do
you then blame the editor for not providing proper weapon stats, or do
you blame the artist for not providing proper artwork?

> And to make matters worse, the Missle, AT-6 also has V.short 
> range.  So, if I've got a target 1km away, I'm better off shooting a 
> Super Bazooka than a 106mm recoiless rifle _or_ an AT-3 Sagger.  Not in 
> Real Life. . . 

The Missile, AT-6 has a maximum range of 1.5 km and an inherent +1 DM.

> >On that note, just because two weapons are listed as medium and heavy
> >does not necessarily mean that the latter will have a longer range.
> 
> Yeah, but a Rheimetall 120mm main gun (TL-8 medium, I guess) has a max 
> effective of 4 km (in ideal conditions.  By the book, optimum 
> engagement range is 2-2.5 km).  An M198 towed 155mm howitzer (TL-8 
> Heavy) has a max effective of. . . 24,000 meters.  Six times as far.  I 
> don't care how coarse your range determination is, someone outta notice 
> that!

Again, these are Real World weapons.  Their specifics are irrelevant
when compared to EA weapons because the weapons in EA do not claim to
be T4 equivalents of The Rheimetall or M198.

You could also use the optional EA Max Range rule (p. 10) to
extrapolate a true maximum range for these two weapons.  Their maximum
ranges would then be 10km or 30km, depending on the ammunition used.
Please don't tell me that now the maximum ranges are too much.

> >*All* weapons have a maximum range of 1,500m in the T4 rulebook,
> >unless specifically stated otherwise (see below).  Many have felt that
> >this is a silly rule.  Emperor's Arsenal includes an optional rule on
> >page 10 that limits weapons to more realistic ranges (although it
> >still isn't perfect).
> 
> Because then the Light Anti Armor Weapon 6 still greatly outperforms 
> the Recoiless Rifle 6.  It now has a greater range!

This is one example only and you can't badmouth an entire product
based on this.  If you don't like it, change it.  Or you could contact
Greg Porter and politely ask why this is so.

> John M. Atkinson
> PS Sorry to be so finicky, but I'm a wargamer who got into Traveller 
> because a friend was touting the wonderful weapons design sequence in 
> TNE FF&S.  So I had him ship me a copy, said 'This is cool!  And it's 
> the first non-hokeycomicbookstyle SF RPG I've found,' so I bought it.  
> Along with the RCEG, Vampire Fleets, and the TNE rulebook.  All 
> wonderful.  So then I shell out for T4, and find it's a better game on 
> it's merits, but the combat resolution is bad. . . 

T4 does use a simpler combat system than TNE, yes, but T4 never has
claimed to "be" TNE.  I believe Marc is working on a new combat system
for T4.1, as is Douglas Berry & myself.

My suggestion to you would be to use your obvious knowledge and come
up with a "true" maximum range list for every weapon in EA.  Then post
it to the list.  You may find that others will actually appreciate
your efforts :)

James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 04 Sep 1997 22:03:57 -0400
From: Thomas Walter Trelenberg <tomt@scri.fsu.edu>
Subject: Re: CSC vehicles and putting them in an FTP

*******************************
If I ever get round to writing a CSC program for Win 95 users, I will 
probably use this interface to store all of the designs created by 
the user (and those posted to the TML) in one convenient database.

Rob's CSC program sounds like a good reason to get a Mac!

Simon
*******************************

Speaking as one of the TML programing deficient, the words that come to
mind are:

SWEET!!!

Please, Do!

Yes, Yes, Yes,....somebody.....anybody.....help those of use out here
who aren't programmers (proffessional or hobby).



As a side question:  Those of you who are talking about steering frac-c
missles using the Lorentz force to "turn" these missles...I believe the
original statement was something like:  ...as it applies a larger force
the faster you go...  --or some such.  Anyway, how are you getting the
excess electric charge onto the missle to start with?  Perhaps something
like the static that builds up on planes going through an
atmoshere...maybe at those speeds the few particles in space would
accomplish the same thing...but I'd hate to depend on that if it were
used as a defensive measure.

Anyway, just a comment.

TT

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 05 Sep 1997 09:56:27 +0800
From: Michael Bailey <mickb@opera.iinet.net.au>
Subject: Thoughts on the Plague of Duskir

Feel free to cut holes in my reasoning (and as a West Australian, Phil, I
should be an inviting target *VBG*).

In my own campaign, the Plague of Duskir wasn't extremely lethal, but
generally killed off between 5 and 15 percent of the Vilani population
infected WITHOUT proper treatment.  On many worlds, medical facilities were
simply overrun  and overburdened by the huge numbers of patients.  The
Terran response was inadequate on a large number of Vilani worlds simply
because of their relatively limited numbers.  Terran medical teams couldn't
be everywhere at once, and on many Vilani worlds the existing medical
facilities were grossly overloaded with cases ranging from mild to lethal.
I pictured the total lethality throughout the Rule of Man to be something
in the order of 3 to 5 % of the Vilani population - not crippling, but
highly disturbing, as nearly every Vilani family would have lost at least
one member on average.

Given that the Plague was a large number of ailments, I added one
additional effect:  a proportion of the male Vilani population was rendered
sterile by one of the diseases (perhaps orchitis (sp?) caused by mumps),
not many (0.5% or so), but further damaging the Vilani morale.

Duskir and his Terran/Vilani research team made the breakthrough by finally
coming up with broad spectrum antiviral drugs.

Later generations tended to inflate the effects of the Plague, out of
proportion to it's actual (but still nasty) effect.

Just idle speculation, anyways!


Michael Bailey
mickb@opera.iinet.net.au
				
pillock-at-large and proud supporter of the Chelsea FC and Fremantle AFL
Clubs!

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 21:15:39 -0500 (CDT)
From: Joseph "Chepe" Lockett <jlockett@io.com>
Subject: GURPS Traveller announced....

This is of obvious interest to me and the other small GURPS cabal here on
TML.  I'm not sure how I feel about the alternate timeline deal, but it
should be interesting.  And maybe SJG can show IG a thing or two about
product proofing and presentation....

From: sdharing@io.com (Scott Haring)
Newsgroups: io.games.sjg.gurps
Subject: [Press Release] GURPS Traveller!
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 1997 13:54:23 -0500
Organization: Illuminati Online

For Immediate Release -- September 4, 1997

SJ Games Announces GURPS Traveller
   Steve Jackson Games is proud to announce that it has acquired the
rights to create a GURPS version of the classic Traveller, the oldest and
most popular outer-space roleplaying game ever.
   This is something we and our fans have wanted for a long, long time,
Steve Jackson said. Im very happy to finally be able to do it,
especially since well be working with the same people who made Traveller
great in the first place.
   Long-time Traveller editor and writer Loren Wiseman will serve as Line
Editor for the GURPS Traveller series of books and will write the first
release. Loren and (Traveller original author) Marc Miller are the real
deal, Managing Editor Scott Haring said. With their help, were going to
do books that the die-hard Traveller fans will love.
   The license from Sweetpea Entertainment -- owners of Traveller after
original publishers Game Designers Workshop went out of business in 1995
- -- sets GURPS Traveller in an alternate timeline from the one currently
being published by Imperium Games. Haring said, In our timeline, Emperor
Strephon doesnt get assassinated, and the `virus that was the entire
basis for Traveller: The New Era did not devastate the Imperium. Our
timeline is a continuation of the original Traveller, though with Wiseman
and Millers help well be taking it in some interesting directions.
   The first GURPS Traveller volume will include a description of the
basic Traveller gameworld, GURPS rules for characters, equipment and
spacecraft of the Traveller universe, and conversion rules between the two
systems. We want players to be able to convert any Traveller material --
and theres a lot of it out there -- to GURPS right off the bat, and we
want Traveller players to be able to play in our alternate timeline,
Haring said.
    The first GURPS Traveller release is tentatively scheduled for an
early 1998 release. Scheduling for subsequent books in the series is yet
to be determined.
   For more information, contact Steve Jackson at (512) 447-7866.

- ----------------------------*------------------------*------------------------
 Joseph L. "Chepe" Lockett  |"Nullum magnum ingenium | GURPS fan, Amiga user,
http://www.io.com/~jlockett | sine mixtura dementiae | Shakespearean scholar,
  Email: jlockett@io.com    | fuit." -- Seneca       | actor and director.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 2 Sep 1997 23:46:53 -0800
From: Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca>
Subject: Re: Sanity

>>Also, I've always wondered at the Second Empire *calling* themselves the
>>"Rule of Man."  Is feminism dead circa AD 2400?
>
>No. Women are secure enough that they don't feel threatened by terms like
>that.  And political correctness is dead.  (It's a future history, so I'm
>picking the future _I_ want :-)

And you are entitled to do so. In my future history, though, men aren't so
insecure they try to defend illogical and ungrammatical terminology with
rationalizations like "political correctness". Stuff like "Rule of Man" is
simply incorrect, since it would logically apply to male humans from any of
the species of humaniti and not just to Terrans, while of course excluding
women of any species.

Frankly, terminology like "Rule of Man" sounds rather goofy to me,
reminiscent of a book of dating tips by Robert Bly or something. This kind
of language is another one of the things that really dates Traveller. But I
do realize it is canon and unlikely to change. In my campaign I use "Rule
of Terra". Not only does this make sense logically and grammatically, it
sounds cool. Also the anti-solomanists get to call it the "Rule of Terror".
Bonus.

Don't think I'm some kind of a SNAG dittohead; I have no problem with games
using steriotypical sex roles and gender-exclusive terminology. I think
Macho Women with Guns is a blast. GURPS Lensman handles the extremely
male-centric source material honestly without Disneyfying the setting or
pretending the sexism doesn't exist.

What I have a problem with, however, are writers who want to have it both
ways; portraying gender-specific roles in a supposedly egalitarian setting.
For example, using terms like "Rule of Man" and gender-specific noble
titles while claiming women feel secure and unthreatened. I'm not saying
the game has to be a happy little gender-neutral utopia, I'm saying to
accept the consequences of the setting.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 04 Sep 1997 20:37:08 -0700
From: Evyn MacDude <wmacdude@Concentric.net>
Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller announced....

Joseph Chepe Lockett wrote:
> 
> This is of obvious interest to me and the other small GURPS cabal here on
> TML.  I'm not sure how I feel about the alternate timeline deal, but it
> should be interesting.  And maybe SJG can show IG a thing or two about
> product proofing and presentation....

Cool tides Dudes, Now maybe will see it done right.
With alternate time lines, maybe we can see TNE finished out.
- -- 
Evyn,
Warleader of the Clan MacDude
Yuppie Hunter of the Forgotten Surf
	Fortalice Desertum
	AD. 1997

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 22:49:00 -0500
From: David Reed <david@techrefuge.com>
Subject: The politics of money (was RE: The Imperial Credit: What's It Worth?)

On Thursday, September 04, 1997 15:32, Erwin Fritz wrote:
> Now, I'm not an economist, so forgive me if this idea sounds stupid.

You're forgiven.  ;-)  I'm not an economist, either, but a student of 
administration and political science.  My take (caveat reader):

> In the Trillion Credit Squadron days, there was a formula which
> calculated
> how much a planetary government could raise in taxes per year. It was
> based on population, government type and law level, IIRC.
>
> Could the Emperor simply declare that this formula (or a similar one)
> is the hard and fast rule for governments on how much money they can
> "print" each year? Debts would simply be illegal; after a few decades
> most world governments would figure out how to "save" for a rainy day.

IMNSHO, this would go over like the proverbial brick outhouse.  Isn't the 
whole premise of the Imperium "hands-off local government"?  Most folks 
don't mind joining the Imperium (why don't we call it the Empire?  Star 
Wars-phobia?) if they can maintain their current governmental structure 
intact, and neither can the Imperium afford to spend resources enforcing 
such nonsense.  This is what I found so ludicrous about the "Ministry of 
Calendar Compliance" (although the implications for espionage were 
hilarious); the Imp cannot possibly beyond a certain amount of expansion 
maintain homogeneity...  It's a self-defeating goal.

This ability to save for a rainy day is not something that many bodies 
politic have learned throughout human history.  Given how little we've 
changed politically-speaking since the stone age (methods only have 
changed, not means or motivations), I don't foresee too many "enlightened" 
cultures doing this.  A question also is how free the economy is with its 
social spending.  Never thought about it until now, but there seem to be a 
total lack of communist cultures, outside of the Zhos, in Traveller. 
 Anyone remember any?

> With my limited understanding of how the money supply works in today's
> economy, I realize that this represents a radical departure from 20th
> century norms. However, would it work?

You and I are right on track with about as much as anyone knows about how 
the money supply works...  I don't think that the World Bank or IMF 
understand it all that well.  Perhaps they do, but I see them more as 
political instruments than neutral arbiters of the economic good.  If we 
understood it better, we'd have more of it, eh?  Anyway, there are too 
many theories that totally disagree, but seem to model certain 
circumstances accurately.  Adam Smith is considered passe in many circles, 
but so is Kenysian (sp?) theory in others.  I don't think Greenspan really 
understands the effects of what he's doing either.  </ramble>

Ultimately, political rationales win over economics anyway, so...  Is it 
in the Imperium's best political interest to control local economies?  I 
don't think so, and neither did Cleon.
______________________________________________________________________

David Reed           | All wickedness is weakness: that plea therefore
                     | With God or Man will gain thee no remission.
david@techrefuge.com |                -John Milton, "Samson Agonistes"
______________________________________________________________________

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 22:57:04 -0500
From: David Reed <david@techrefuge.com>
Subject: RE: Commerce and Trade in T4

On Thursday, September 04, 1997 16:37, Brody  Dunn wrote:
> and Anders Backman said

> > knows maybe even politicians will learn something in the next thousand
> > years? ;)

Um, yeah, right, sure.  Don't hold your breath.  Even in the next 2500, I 
don't think it'll happen.

> Also as the basic rate of interest for starship loans is in the order of
> 3 percent this indicates a low to non-existant inflation rate
> (Imperialwise at any rate - local planetary effects are left as an
> exercise for the referee).

Local planetary effects would vary tremendously, or there might be no flow 
of goods...  High inflation rate may be good for other nearby worlds, and 
offer a market with cheap labor.  The subsector economic models have to 
just really suck.  *shudder*  Imagine what a sector duke has to worry 
about!

Would make for a great scenario...  How do you convince, say, a 
Brazilian-type world not to print more money to pay debts exacerbated by 
printing more money?

> It also begs the question of what is a fair profit?  After all in a
> competitive environment the price will tend to be as low as possible
> accounting for a fair profit so what is fair given that inflation seems
> to be a zero factor.

Fair profit is what the entrepreneur thinks it is.  How competitive is the 
shipbuilding industry?  Or shipping?  Hmmm.  I hadn't thought about it, 
but if you want a ship built, and are not a megacorp, you're pretty much 
stuck with the local shipyard.  Thoughts?

> How much would a bank pay in interest for any amounts invested - if
> anything?  Have to be less than 3 percent - so what is the incentive in
> savings.  Or does the imperium cap ship loan rates due to the staggering
> sums involved and the need to keep interstellar commerce moving?

An interesting thoughts.  I think that those ship loan rates are probably 
like the US 'prime rate' (which no one uses that I can tell).  And would 
apply only to credit worthy applicants (megacorps, etc)...  What about the 
loan shark market where people who don't have the best, or any credit, get 
their ships financed?  (Enter Jabba the Hutt...)  I think I'll do this to 
the next bunch of PCs that want to buy a post-character generation 
starship.  *evil cackle*
______________________________________________________________________

David Reed           | All wickedness is weakness: that plea therefore
                     | With God or Man will gain thee no remission.
david@techrefuge.com |                -John Milton, "Samson Agonistes"
______________________________________________________________________

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 23:09:44 -0500
From: David Reed <david@techrefuge.com>
Subject: RE: A scenario idea:

On Thursday, September 04, 1997 19:06, SD Mooney wrote:
> SPOILER WARNING!
> SPOILER WARNING!
> SPOILER WARNING!
> SPOILER WARNING!
> SPOILER WARNING!
> SPOILER WARNING!
> SPOILER WARNING!
> SPOILER WARNING!
> SPOILER WARNING!
> SPOILER WARNING!
> SPOILER WARNING!
> SPOILER WARNING!
> SPOILER WARNING!

> The players board the ship and find evidence that the crew have murdered
> themselves brutally, that the contragrav is still operational, and that
> the
> new J-Drive is still powered. The drive distortion field causes severe
> mental damage, (almost like a neural disruptor) and causes humans to
> freak
> out and go psycotic. The crew boarding will attempt to destroy
> themselves
> and their own ship in brutal and perverse ways. The HRD engineer (very
> mad
> now) will set the drive to engage, and unless stopped by released the
> fore
> section lifeboat will cause a massive mis-jump, and death.

This was the subject of the first T4 adventure I played in (at GenCon '96) 
run by one of the IG fellows, forgot his name, but he ran a good scenario.. 
 This insanity had another cause, however, than the ship itself, an 
artifact reminiscent of Clarke's Rama, that produced psi-like interference 
in response to EMS scanning of any kind that the former crew of the ship 
was investigating.  It turned out to be a portal of some kind, leading to 
some unfriendly tree-like folks.  It was entertaining, and they were 
Hresh, I think, that turned many an NPC into a human pretzel.  Shotgun's 
made short work of them, but there sure were a bunch of the little bonsai!

An adventure like this, run correctly, as this was, creates an excellent 
suspense element that no slash 'n burn adventure can, and has just enough 
of the element of horror.  It's not every day you find the corpse of a 
seasoned Scout lying in bed where he gouged his own eyes out with a spoon!
______________________________________________________________________

David Reed           | All wickedness is weakness: that plea therefore
                     | With God or Man will gain thee no remission.
david@techrefuge.com |                -John Milton, "Samson Agonistes"
______________________________________________________________________

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 21:14:04 -0800
From: Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca>
Subject: Re: Ship Missions

> I am trying to fill out a table for ship design detailing various ship
> missions.
>
> Column 1 is the basic mission. Column 2 is a mission modifier.
>
> Does anyone care to make some suggestions?
>
> SHIP MISSIONS
> Code  Basic      Alternate  Alternate  Armament   Suffix    Suffix
>-----  ---------  ---------  ---------  ---------  --------  --------
> A     Auxiliary  Assault    Attack                Ablatant  Armored
> B     Battle                                      B Globe
> C     Cruiser    Corvette                         C-PAW
> D     Destroyer                        Driver     Damper    Drop
>
> E     Escort	   Explorer                         EM
> F     Frigate    Fighter                          Fusion
> G     Gig                                         Gravitic
> H     Fueler                                      HEPlaR    Heavy
> I     Intruder                                    Insertion Imperial
[snip]

Excuse my impertinence, but what exactly is the purpose of this table? Is
it used for creating missions for players? For rolling random encounters?
For describing missions ships are on? Is it part of the ship's registry?
What?

Suppose my players are in a 100 dton reserve scout and are currently
hauling commercial cargo; are they a Reserve Scout (RS, or whatever),
Comercial Explorer, Speculative Trader, or what? Why would they care? Do
they have to get registered for a particular mission? What if the mission
changes during the expedition? Who says what a ship's mission is and how do
they check it? I'm not saying the table is bad, I just don't see what it's
for.

- --
Richard Hough
rdhough@orca.bc.ca

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 07:57:45 +2
From: "RFXn" <mlaakso@utu.fi>
Subject: Re: It's Heeere.... [GURPS Traveller]

On  4 Sep 97 at 17:06, George Herbert wrote:

> From: http://www.sjgames.com/ill/
> 
> >September 4, 1997: SJ Games Announces GURPS Traveller
> >
> > Steve Jackson Games is proud to announce that it has acquired the rights
> > to create a GURPS version of the classic Traveller, the oldest and most
> > popular outer-space roleplaying game ever. 

	About time!!! Now _this_ is the product I've been waiting for years!

	*applause* 

/RFXn     mlaakso@utu.fi        aka. Matti Laakso
 -Phone: +358-(0)2-237 9928       YO-Kyla 19 A 11
 -IRC: RFXn                       FIN-20540  TURKU
 -Talk: RFXn@delenn.yok.utu.fi    Finland

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 22:19:48 -0800
From: "Zane H. Healy" <healyzh@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller announced....

>This is of obvious interest to me and the other small GURPS cabal here on
>TML.  I'm not sure how I feel about the alternate timeline deal, but it
>should be interesting.  And maybe SJG can show IG a thing or two about
>product proofing and presentation....

Why does this sound like "Sweetpea Entertainment" is looking for someone
that can do Traveller justice?  Maybe we aren't the only one sick of the
trash IG has been shoveling our way (don't get me wrong, I'm talking
packaging here, not content).

I don't know about throwing out the stuff in MegaTraveller, but I'm all for
throwing TNE in the bin where it belongs (yes, it had cool stuff, but the
Virus concept stunk).

On an interesting side note it's release will mean that we will immediatly
have a number of cool supplements available to use!  Any GURPS Traveller GM
will have material available to throw at his poor players that has never
been considered for any Traveller supplement!

I recommend the following URL http://www.sjgames.com/ill/ it has the press
release there for the next few days, and links to all sorts of GURPS info
for those that aren't familiar with it.

The only down side I see to this is that I don't remember seeing any really
great starship diagrams in any of the SJG products.

Question, it says there will be conversion rules between the two systems.
Great, which two?  I own five different systems (counting GURPS), and I've
lost track of how many published varients!  Personally I'd want to be able
to convert between MegaTraveller and GURPS as most of the classic material
is in the same format as Mega, or else available in Mega format (as is the
case with almost any of the ships).

In any case this is the last best hope for Traveller!

			Zane


| Zane H. Healy                    | UNIX Systems Adminstrator |
| healyzh@ix.netcom.com (primary)  | Linux Enthusiast          |
| healyzh@holonet.net (alternate)  | Mac Programmer            |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------+
| For Empire of the Petal Throne and Traveller Role Playing,   |
| and the collecting of Classic Computers with info on them.   |
| see http://www.dragonfire.net/~healyzh/                      |

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 01:39:29 -0500 (CDT)
From: jatkins6@ix.netcom.com (John Atkinson)
Subject: Re: Battle dress turtles  (was RE: Traveller-digest V1997 #1764)

You wrote: 

>> How do you throw a tread on a grav tank, and if you're advanced 
enough 
>> to have battle armor, why would you want anything but a grav tank?
>                        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>For the same reasons that military today do not rely on only armour to
>fight a battle.  Tanks are expensive-- extremely so if you are going
>to use them to hunt down your opponent's infantry.  You also cannot
>hold ground with armour to any real extent-- the tanks are just too
>easily spotted and eliminated.

You misunderstand me, my good sir.  I'm a Lightfighter on weekends, so 
I'm passingly familliar with the argument that tanks are too easy to 
kill for the money spent on them.  I believe it, after AT this summer.  
To easy to get too close to to vehicles in laager, toss a satchel 
charge onto it, and run like hell.  At least on a MILES battlefield.  
Dunno if I'd volunteer for that detail if the lead were real.

But my point was, if you can build grav tanks, why would you want 
anything with treads?  If you're using treads in a low-cost militia 
unit, you can't afford battlearmor either, likely.  So battlearmor and 
treads will almost never coexist.  So the reason to get out of a tank 
while wearing battle armor given as 'maybe you threw a tread' is kinda. 
.. . iffy.  :)

John M. Atkinson

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 01:56:00 -0500 (CDT)
From: jatkins6@ix.netcom.com (John Atkinson)
Subject: Re: Battle dress turtles  (was RE: Traveller-digest V1997

You wrote: 

>But you can't win "hearts and minds" from inside a battlepod.  Sure, 

Every time I hear that phrase, I just cringe. . . You don't want to win 
hearts and minds.  You want to take and hold ground.  You can't do that 
from inside a battlepod.  I don't care what you call it, it's just an 
itty-bitty vehicle, and has all the limitations thereof.

>Battlepods would probably be used as Marine Cavalry, racing about the
>battlefield providing shock effect at specific points, and reinforcing 
weak
>spots.

Cavalry. . . Excellent analogy.

John M. Atkinson

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 04 Sep 1997 22:48:06 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller

George Herbert wrote

From: http://www.sjgames.com/ill/

>September 4, 1997: SJ Games Announces GURPS Traveller
>
> Steve Jackson Games is proud to announce that it has acquired the rights
> to create a GURPS version of the classic Traveller, the oldest and most
> popular outer-space roleplaying game ever. 

> Long-time Traveller editor and writer Loren Wiseman will serve as
> Line Editor for the GURPS Traveller series of books and will write
> the first release. 

Today is my birthday (I'm 31) and this news is the best present I
received  (well actually it is the only present I receeived but you know
what I mean). I have always been more enamored of the setting for
Traveller than the systems used to run it.  GURPS has always been my
favorite game system, it is not perfect, but it works well for me. I am
eagerly awaiting this product.

Once Traveller has been GURPSized we can tie anything into Traveller and
this should help in our discussion of Illuminated Traveller. :)

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1782
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Friday, September 5 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1783



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Economics Questions
Re: GURPS Traveller announced....
Re: The Gateway Book - Replies to Various Comments (LONG)
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1781
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1782
Re: Task Resolution
Re: GURPS Traveller announced....
Re: GURPS Traveller announced....
GURPS Trav (T-5?)
Re: The politics of money (was RE: The Imperial Credit: What's It Worth?)
GrrrrrrrrPS
Re: Battle dress turtles  (was RE: Traveller-digest V1997 #1764)
Re: GURPS Trav (T-5?)
Re: The Gateway Book - Replies to Various Comments (LONG)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 02:47:13 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Macpherson <john35@wharton.upenn.edu>
Subject: Re: Economics Questions

Ian Whitchurch <ianw@zed.com.au> asked:
>(1) How do we write an economics system to reflect competition (eg everybody
>else is also shipping goods between the Industrial and Agricultural planets
>that are right next door), but is nevertheless usuable in a game ?

	This has long been a problem in Traveller economics.  As Ian
points out, under Trav trading rules, a few trips between an Industrial
and Ag world that happen to be near each other, and any trader is likely
to get rich quick.  This shouldn't happen.  Why?  Because as word gets out
about this highly profitable trade route more freight capacity will come
or be built for it, driving the price for freight transport down.  At
equilibrium the price of freight transport should be the same between any
pair of worlds.  Also, at equilibrium the largest price difference that 
could exist for any good between a pair of worlds would be the cost of 
transporting that good from one world to the other.  Temporary economic 
swings may move these price differences to be greater or less than the 
cost of transport, but free traders and import-export companies exist to 
correct these differences.
	The cost of freight itself should not be the arbitrary 
1000Cr/ton.  The cost of freight should be directly linked to the cost of 
shipping capacity.  If you want to determine what the cost of freight is 
in your campaign, break out those ships you consider to be the standard 
freight haulers and figure their cost/ton to move freight.  The 
competitive price will be equal to this figure.  
	Of course, in many areas freight hauling will not be perfectly
competitive.  For instance, in the early Imperium with the rapid 
expansion of civilization and rapid growth in the volume of trade, 
shipping will be in high demand.  
	Actually, what would happen is that the price of ships would be
bid up and capitalize much of the additional profits from ship ownership. 
The profits would instead accrue to the owners of shipyards, who would
then have the appropriate incentive to expand ship building capacity.  
	But back to the cost of freight.  The way to easily handle competitive 
pressures in the game is to create a Competition Factor.  In perfectly 
competitive markets the CF=1.  In areas where shipping capacity is in high 
demand, the CF>1.  To get the price of freight, multiply the CF times the 
competitive cost of freight transport.  The CF should be close to 1 in 
the Imperial core, increasing with distance from the center of the 
Empire.  The CF can also be increased by collusive practices by megacorp 
shippers.  The base cost of freight might be increased by hazards from 
war, etc.  As for what the actual value of the CF should be, it is 
difficult to give specific guidance.  Determining analytically what the 
CF should be would require more information than we have for Trav 
worlds.  I suggest that in new areas, the CF should start at 5 or higher 
and then rapidly (in a few years) drop to 1.5 or 2.  From there it would 
more slowly approach the imperial core standard of 1.

> (2) Given core/periphery theory, we can predict that the Imperial Core
> (Sylea in M0, Sylea + Sector Capitals) will have a net trade deficit with
> the provinces , because of the amount of net invisibles <repatriated
> profits etc>. How can we quantify this ? 

	Well, I don't really believe in what you call core/periphery 
theory.  If you look at the numbers, trade between developed nations 
makes for an overwhelming share of total world trade.  Furthermore, that 
trade that does take place has been occuring on worse and worse terms of 
trade fort he underdeveloped world.  Developing countries (Korea, Czech 
Republic, etc.) have been growing rapidly lately and have been able to 
maintain trade surplusses with the West, but this is only a temporary 
phenomenon.  As these countries develop, their trade surplus tends to 
shrink.  This trade surplus is exactly what finances their rapid growth.  
Since developed trade partners buy more of our goods, this temporary 
trade surplus in the end makes everyone richer.
	This is one of my pet peeves with Milieu Zero, the program 
ostensibly put forth by the Merchants Guild to exploit worlds is totally 
against the best interests of the Imperium and even, in many cases, 
against the best interests of individual merchants.  Robbing someone makes 
them poorer and you richer, but you can only do it once.  Trading with 
someone makes you both richer and you can do it forever.

>(3) What is the Imperial Ruling Rate of Interest, and how can we justify it
>given the economic development rules in PE ?

	How can you justify anything in PE?  Seriously, that book was 
meant to make a good game, rather than a good economic simulator.  I 
wasn't particularly impressed with it.
	As for the interest rate, my spreadsheet tells me the rate of 
return on a starship loan is 6%.  This is close enough to a "real world" 
rate that you could use other real world rates for other more or less 
risky ventures.
	It should be noted that this is for the loan terms as described 
in TNE.  I don't remember what they are in T4, so someone correct me if I 
have these wrong: 20% down, 1/240th of ship price for 480 months.

>(4) Why do any free traders buy their ships ... it is simpler and cheaper to
>lease the space on someone else's ships for your speculative cargo, and 
>frees up that 10% deposit for speculative cargo.

	Actually, I'm sure there are lots of companies all over the 
Imperium who do very much what you suggest -- they're called 
import-export companies.  Shipping is a low risk, low return investment, 
while speculative trading is a high risk, high return investment.
	If you're looking for the secret to fabulous wealth in Trav, look
no further than the refining of fuel for starships.  It is actually
impossible in any sane economic system for it to be cheaper to carry a
fuel purification plant around in a ship with you than to buy the fuel at
the starport.  Why?  The price of refined fuel should equal the cost of
the refinery and the power to run it. The cost of the purification plant 
is spread out over the volume of fuel refined.  A refinery carried around 
on a ship is run about one day every few weeks to refine a new load of 
fuel for the ship.  But a plant at the starport could be run round the 
clock every day of the week, spreading the cost of the plant out over far 
more units of fuel.

> (5) What is the value per ton (or displacement ton) of the staples of interstellar
> commerce ? And what *are* the staples of interstellar commerce ? (Given Cr1000
> per displacement ton per parsec, you can ship Scout Beer, cost Cr2/liter 28 parsecs
> before the shipping cost doubles the price of the beer ...)

	What I'd like to do is look at historical shipping costs and see 
what sorts of things were traded when real shipping costs compared to 
Trav shipping costs.
	Given that shipping is relatively inexpensive, all sorts of things
are likely to be traded.  The first things to be traded will those that
have the highest value/volume ratio.  Roughly in this order:  Information,
luxury goods, electronics, capital goods, power plants, consumer durables,
consumer goods, food, raw materials. 
	
>That should do for now :)
	More than happy to answer more questions as they come up.

- -JM

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 05 Sep 1997 17:07:01 -0900
From: Harry <paharris@postoffice.newnham.utas.edu.au>
Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller announced....

At 08:37 PM 4/09/97 -0700, you wrote:

>Cool tides Dudes, Now maybe will see it done right.
>With alternate time lines, maybe we can see TNE finished out.

!!!! Sorry ??!!! Why exactly would you like to see an obviously superior
system *finished out*. What exactly do you mean by that anyway? Please
explain so that I can point out the error in your ways.


Harry

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 02:24:56 -0500 (CDT)
From: jatkins6@ix.netcom.com (John Atkinson)
Subject: Re: The Gateway Book - Replies to Various Comments (LONG)

You wrote: 

>Nowhere in EA is it stated that the specific Real World weapons you
>describe are the one's EA has listed (you don't have to look any
>further than the picture atop p. 32).  IMO, this is not a problem.  If
>you want to recreate specific Real World weapons, but either 3G3 or
>FF&S2.

Picture atop p. 32. . .I liked that picture.  Gave me some wierd ideas. 
. . :)  Hey, I'm not saying that because they don't correspond to 
specific real life weapons they are bad.  It's because they don't 
correspond in their stats to the way their descriptions have them 
working.  I know what a recoiless rifle does, how it works, and roughly 
what should happen when you build one.  I also know that (with the 
exception of the Carl Gustav, which fits in the LAAW category anyway) 
RRs tend to be tripod mounted and treated more like artillery pieces.  
LAAWs are unguided, with only the most rudimentary sights and are fired 
from a man's shoulder.  They are inherently more innacurate.  

>And I wouldn't put too much faith in the artwork providing clues as to
>each weapons' capabilities.  The Cannon, Very Heavy-6 looks like the
>Paris gun, but does not possess the immense range of that historic
>gun.  The text goes on to say that it is a *direct fire* weapon.  Do
>you then blame the editor for not providing proper weapon stats, or do
>you blame the artist for not providing proper artwork?

I have yet to find a rulebook of any kind where the artwork corresponds 
to the rules exactally. . . :)  The clue that I had about the nature of 
the LAAW-6 was the bit 'slightly improved version of LAAW-5' which 
indicates it's an evolutionary improvement over a WWII-level weapon, 
and it's listed as being reloadable.  The only Terran weapons in that 
category is the Super Bazooka, thus. . . 

>Again, these are Real World weapons.  Their specifics are irrelevant
>when compared to EA weapons because the weapons in EA do not claim to
>be T4 equivalents of The Rheimetall or M198.

Ok, you design something that could realistically fit the descriptions 
of 'medium armament for armored vehicles' and 'heavy vehicle armament 
or artillery piece' then tell me that the artillery piece has equal 
range as compared to the medium armament for armored vehicles. 

>You could also use the optional EA Max Range rule (p. 10) to
>extrapolate a true maximum range for these two weapons.  Their maximum
>ranges would then be 10km or 30km, depending on the ammunition used.
>Please don't tell me that now the maximum ranges are too much.

No, given the coarseness of the T4 range categories, the 30km figure is 
close enough.  But now I'm confused as to how APFSDS is more innacurate 
than HE. . .

>This is one example only and you can't badmouth an entire product
>based on this.  If you don't like it, change it.  Or you could contact
>Greg Porter and politely ask why this is so.

Oh, I've been taking a closer look and finding things that are... a 
little wierd.  Take the ACR, RF-10.  To fit 250 rounds into a 1.1 kg 
magazine requires rounds which weigh less than 3.9 grams.  The only way 
I could come up, after spending all afternoon trying, is to make 5mm, 
850 joule-rated ammunition.  Then to make a damage of 4, you need at 
least 1350.5 joules of muzzle energy.  Which means you've got a really 
long barrel. . . And then when I try to design a rapid fire weapon 
around that cartridge, within the price constraints for the ACR, RF-10, 
and achieving that muzzle velocity, I end up with a barrel that's 
77.8cm long, and the weapon is underweight by .7 kg.  I'm trying to 
imagine a automatic rifle that's got that long a barrel. . . it just 
sounds wierd.  And the math don't add up.

>T4 does use a simpler combat system than TNE, yes, but T4 never has
>claimed to "be" TNE.  I believe Marc is working on a new combat system
>for T4.1, as is Douglas Berry & myself.

Sounds interesting. . . 

>My suggestion to you would be to use your obvious knowledge and come
>up with a "true" maximum range list for every weapon in EA.  Then post
>it to the list.  You may find that others will actually appreciate
>your efforts :)

Don't tempt me. . . I can't promise for the SF (read, TL-9 and above) 
but for the TL-8 and lower. . . :)

Although you run into problems making decisions.  I mean, a longbow.  
Simple, TL-1 weapon.  Has like, nine 'ranges'.  There's the max range 
shot by a professional who's been shooting since childhood in an arc.  
There's max effective range where that archer can hit a man-sized 
target.  Max range where it can penetrate the period mild steel armor.  
Max range it was actually used in battle (which is apparently a lot 
shorter than most of the others).  Then when you have modern schmuck 
dabbling with it, who havn't been pulling since age three.  No matter 
how good his physical condition is, and how long he's been using it, 
He's got a range where he can get the arrow to phsyically get out 
there, a range where he can hit a target, a range where he can punch 
steel, and all of them are shorter than a fellow who's been doing it 
basically since birth.

TL-2 musket. . . well, do you want max effective range of a 
hand-built-with-tender-loving-care piece, or of a 
mass-produced-by-lowest-bidder military piece?  They vary.  
Dramatically.  And of course, max effective range of Joe Snuffy taking 
potshots is somewhat different from max effective range of Joe Snuffy 
and three hundred of his closest friends firing in volley. . . :)

But if you want, I can sit down and do some real research. . . 

John M. Atkinson

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 05 Sep 1997 08:18:53 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1781

On Thu, 4 Sep 1997 20:38:47 -0400, you wrote:

>Date: Thu, 04 Sep 1997 16:57:22 GMT
>From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
>Subject: Re: Andy Lilly, Proofreading and Virus
>
>On Thu, 04 Sep 1997 12:03:28 GMT, Phillip McGregor wrote:
>
>[stuff regarding the quality of other companies' publications snipped]
>
>> Even FASA, years ago, when I was doing Rigger Black Book, offered to mail proofs
>> to me for final checking -- but I pointed out the delay built in because of my
>> location (3 weeks, minimum) and I said I was happy to trust them (as they were
>> obviously capable).
>
>The RBB is _not_ a good comparison as a competently produced product,
>IMNSHO.

What, the writing (I'll accept blame for that)? The proofreading and graphics
were a competent and successful effort. Perhaps they could (and would) do better
today, but RBB is *still* better in all respects than *any* IG book.

Phil
- ---------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU)
Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)
Designer, Standard Role Playing (PGD)

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 05 Sep 1997 08:40:20 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1782

On Fri, 5 Sep 1997 03:09:18 -0400, you wrote:

>Date: Fri, 05 Sep 1997 09:56:27 +0800
>From: Michael Bailey <mickb@opera.iinet.net.au>
>Subject: Thoughts on the Plague of Duskir
>
>Feel free to cut holes in my reasoning (and as a West Australian, Phil, I
>should be an inviting target *VBG*).
>
>In my own campaign, the Plague of Duskir wasn't extremely lethal, but
>generally killed off between 5 and 15 percent of the Vilani population
>infected WITHOUT proper treatment.

A not unreasonable sort of disease response in a previously unexposed populace
that has some knowledge of diseases and how they spread. Without using
quarantine procedures I would say that double or triple this would likely.

>On many worlds, medical facilities were
>simply overrun  and overburdened by the huge numbers of patients.

This *sounds* OK, until you think about it. The TC sent out individuals and
small groups in the intial wave of occupation forces after the Vilani conquest
- -- it says so in the published materials. However, it seems that the large waves
of colonisation occurred only *after* the Estigarribbia coup. So, at both
instances, the military were in effective control ... and the Terrans had had
over a hundred years of contact with the Vilani, and this includes conquered
Vilani worlds. So it seems that you must argue that the Military and the
Civilians were incredibly incompetent to not notice that the inhabitants of said
conquered worlds were dying like flies *or* that the PoD was nonexistent (the
Vilani "stab in the back" claim) to wildly overinflated in death rates.

>The
>Terran response was inadequate on a large number of Vilani worlds simply
>because of their relatively limited numbers.  Terran medical teams couldn't
>be everywhere at once, and on many Vilani worlds the existing medical
>facilities were grossly overloaded with cases ranging from mild to lethal.

It doesn't take Terran medical teams. It simply takes supplies of antibiotics
and antivirals with some simple instructions on how to use them.

>I pictured the total lethality throughout the Rule of Man to be something
>in the order of 3 to 5 % of the Vilani population - not crippling, but
>highly disturbing, as nearly every Vilani family would have lost at least
>one member on average.

Now, given that the old power structures were being displaced and the old
certainties replaced with and by a new and progressive culture, this is not at
all unreasonable ... more or less typical in the aftermath of a war, and not
requiring anything with the rep of the PoD to explain it. It is a nothing event,
in effect, at this level.

>Given that the Plague was a large number of ailments, I added one
>additional effect:  a proportion of the male Vilani population was rendered
>sterile by one of the diseases (perhaps orchitis (sp?) caused by mumps),
>not many (0.5% or so), but further damaging the Vilani morale.

Disturbing, but hardly deserving of all we have been told of the PoD.

>Duskir and his Terran/Vilani research team made the breakthrough by finally
>coming up with broad spectrum antiviral drugs.
>
>Later generations tended to inflate the effects of the Plague, out of
>proportion to it's actual (but still nasty) effect.

Yep, like I said, this would be Vilani nationalists and their equivalent of
Hitler's "stab in the back".

>Just idle speculation, anyways!

And all pretty reasonable.

Phil
- ---------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU)
Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)
Designer, Standard Role Playing (PGD)

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 05:17:54 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

In a message dated 97-09-04 13:59:17 EDT, you write:

<< > >Attachment Converted: "TRAV41~11.TXT" >

  Who posted this?  (Remember - I'm the one who doesn't receive routing info
 w/my msgs!)
 
 Tx!  >>

I mistakenly posted the Task Chapter to the whole list instead of to the
address who requested it.

Sorry.

Marc

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 05 Sep 1997 02:31:24 PDT
From: "Charles Li" <chaslimd@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller announced....

>Great, which two?  I own five different systems (counting GURPS), >
For T4 conversion to GURPS terms.

>In any case this is the last best hope for Traveller!

Remember, this is a SJ Games conversion to the Traveller background and 
T4 rules into the GURPS rules, and not mean to supplant T4.  It is 
really a boon for GURPS players, and for those Traveller GMs willing to 
look into it, the other GURPS supplements can really add diversity to a 
T4 campaign.... the TML should be forewarned, the GURPS mailing list is 
used to far worse than our list, and besides, almost no power exists on 
the GURPS list.

Just another Man In Black.


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 05 Sep 1997 02:36:44 PDT
From: "Charles Li" <chaslimd@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller announced....

>>Cool tides Dudes, Now maybe will see it done right.
>>With alternate time lines, maybe we can see TNE finished out.
>
>!!!! Sorry ??!!! Why exactly would you like to see an obviously 
superior
>system *finished out*. What exactly do you mean by that anyway? Please
>explain so that I can point out the error in your ways.
>
>
>Harry

    As the unfortunate TNE fan, according to GURPS Traveller, TNE will 
never have existed since Strephon survives and no virus occured.  So 
actually, TNE does not occur, let alone finish out, in the setting of 
GURPS Traveller.
   Long live the Imperium!!!!!!!!

^ Man In Black

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 09:46:00 -0400
From: Bill Prankard <BPRANKARD@theiia.org>
Subject: GURPS Trav (T-5?)

>Date: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 22:19:48 -0800
>From: "Zane H. Healy" <healyzh@ix.netcom.com>
>Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller announced....

>>This is of obvious interest to me and the other small GURPS cabal here on
>>TML.  I'm not sure how I feel about the alternate timeline deal, but it
>>should be interesting.  And maybe SJG can show IG a thing or two about
>>product proofing and presentation....

>Why does this sound like "Sweetpea Entertainment" is looking for someone
>that can do Traveller justice?  Maybe we aren't the only one sick of the
>trash IG has been shoveling our way (don't get me wrong, I'm talking
>packaging here, not content).

Could be an Illuminati Plot!
(remember which company brought you such delights as pickeled FNORDS!<G>)

>I don't know about throwing out the stuff in MegaTraveller, but I'm all for
>throwing TNE in the bin where it belongs (yes, it had cool stuff, but the
>Virus concept stunk).

>On an interesting side note it's release will mean that we will immediatly
>have a number of cool supplements available to use!  Any GURPS Traveller GM
>will have material available to throw at his poor players that has never
>been considered for any Traveller supplement!

Not to mention all of Evil Stevies GURPS universes.  Portals to wierd 
dimensions, alternate timelines, or even have the PC's take a few classes at 
IOU!

Finaly we learn the Grandfather is small potatoes, compared to the might of 
Old Cthuluhu!  Muhahahahahaaaa!

<The Commander's physician gives him a spray hypo of tranq>
Sorry, years of demetia as a GM...

>I recommend the following URL http://www.sjgames.com/ill/ it has the press
>release there for the next few days, and links to all sorts of GURPS info
>for those that aren't familiar with it.

>The only down side I see to this is that I don't remember seeing any really
>great starship diagrams in any of the SJG products.

We'll just have to see their version of "Starships"

>Question, it says there will be conversion rules between the two systems.
>Great, which two?  I own five different systems (counting GURPS), and I've
>lost track of how many published varients!  Personally I'd want to be able
>to convert between MegaTraveller and GURPS as most of the classic material
>is in the same format as Mega, or else available in Mega format (as is the
>case with almost any of the ships).

3G^3 has weapon conversions for both TNE and T4 and GURPS.  IIRC they even 
had coversions to CT and MT in previous editions.  This is mearly 
speculative, but if they alter the timeline, it might be like CT in which 
there never was a MT or TNE.  But since T4 is the current published version, 
they might go with that one.

>In any case this is the last best hope for Traveller!

Is GURPS Traveller then, dare I say it...

T5?
<The Commander Ducks>

 --------------------------------------
\\  //  "New Technologies for the New Imperium"
T E K   Military and Civilian Contractor
//  \\  Contact cmdrx@magicnet.net or bprankard@theiia.org

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 05 Sep 1997 08:07:58 -0600
From: Erwin Fritz <efritz@glja.com>
Subject: Re: The politics of money (was RE: The Imperial Credit: What's It Worth?)

David Reed wrote:
> 
> On Thursday, September 04, 1997 15:32, Erwin Fritz wrote:
> > In the Trillion Credit Squadron days, there was a formula which
> > calculated
> > how much a planetary government could raise in taxes per year. It was
> > based on population, government type and law level, IIRC.
> >
> > Could the Emperor simply declare that this formula (or a similar one)
> > is the hard and fast rule for governments on how much money they can
> > "print" each year? Debts would simply be illegal; after a few decades
> > most world governments would figure out how to "save" for a rainy day.
> 
> IMNSHO, this would go over like the proverbial brick outhouse.  Isn't the
> whole premise of the Imperium "hands-off local government"?  Most folks

Yes, that's true. I just needed to be reminded of it.

> don't mind joining the Imperium (why don't we call it the Empire?  Star

Actually, in my campaign we do call it the Empire. In fact, in my Library
I've done a global search and replace operation on the word Imperium.
I never liked that word. "Empire" is much cooler, in my opinion.

> This ability to save for a rainy day is not something that many bodies
> politic have learned throughout human history.  Given how little we've
> changed politically-speaking since the stone age (methods only have
> changed, not means or motivations), I don't foresee too many "enlightened"
> cultures doing this.  A question also is how free the economy is with its
> social spending.  Never thought about it until now, but there seem to be a
> total lack of communist cultures, outside of the Zhos, in Traveller.
>  Anyone remember any?
> 

Pure communism (which doesn't exist on this planet) really means that 
there is no government. A communist planet, with a corresponding
socialist economy, will become government type 0, if it maintains its
purity. If it doesn't, as has become the case with communist states on
this planet, it becomes either democratic (the former USSR) or 
totalitarian (China).


> Ultimately, political rationales win over economics anyway, so...  Is it
> in the Imperium's best political interest to control local economies?  I
> don't think so, and neither did Cleon.

Excellent point. This gives me an idea.

Let's say a world (governed by the Silly Party, of course) decides to 
spend far more than it can afford. It gets itself into real trouble.
The Imperium offers to bail it out but with a catch (because TANSSAAFL).
It must "donate" a couple of gas giants, with moons, to the Navy for
the creation of a depot.

This has benefits for both parties. The Imperium gets a naval depot
for a small expenditure of cash. The world gets out of financial doo-doo
and reaps the economic benefits of having a large naval contingent in
its system.

Of course, this works only if the world is in a strategic location.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 10:45:13 -0400 (EDT)
From: SemoFetus@aol.com
Subject: GrrrrrrrrPS

I, for one, sure as hell hope that GURPS Traveller doesn't become the
"official" Traveller now.  I've never been too fond of GURPS as a system, and
I'm really not too fond of the prospect of having to buy the GURPS rules and
then buy the Traveller Sourcebook...

I don't think that it will become the "official" Traveller (after all, Marc
keeps posting T4.1 stuffs to this list) just yet, and I am one of those
people that don't think going GURPS is the greatest thing to happen to
Traveller.

But, then again, I guess it could be worse...

Marc could have licensed out Trav to Palladium :)

<shudder>

Semo

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 05 Sep 1997 07:36:20 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Battle dress turtles  (was RE: Traveller-digest V1997 #1764)

At 01:39 AM 9/5/97 -0500, you wrote:

>You misunderstand me, my good sir.  I'm a Lightfighter on weekends, so 
>I'm passingly familliar with the argument that tanks are too easy to 
>kill for the money spent on them.  I believe it, after AT this summer.  
>To easy to get too close to to vehicles in laager, toss a satchel 
>charge onto it, and run like hell.  At least on a MILES battlefield.  
>Dunno if I'd volunteer for that detail if the lead were real.

Hoo-rah!  Yes, it's much easier to go for the Medal of Honor when the only
consequence of blowing it is that annoting keening hit whistle...

I take it you're NG, what unit?

>But my point was, if you can build grav tanks, why would you want 
>anything with treads?  If you're using treads in a low-cost militia 
>unit, you can't afford battlearmor either, likely.  So battlearmor and 
>treads will almost never coexist.  So the reason to get out of a tank 
>while wearing battle armor given as 'maybe you threw a tread' is kinda. 
>. . iffy.  :)

For pure defence units, trads can make some sense at TL12-13.  The savings
in cost and power allow you to mount very powerful weapons, along with the
fire control to force the grav vehicles into terrain-hugging flight at a
great distance.  This destroys their mobility advantage early.

A mixed force of traditional treaded tanks, fast grav cavalry, and infantry
could make life extremely difficult for an invader.

By TL14+, grav vehicles become good enough to overcome the increasingly
samll benefits of tracks, so tracks disappear except for certain specilzed
applications.

- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 05 Sep 1997 07:42:51 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: GURPS Trav (T-5?)

At 09:46 AM 9/5/97 -0400, you wrote:

>>Why does this sound like "Sweetpea Entertainment" is looking for someone
>>that can do Traveller justice?  Maybe we aren't the only one sick of the
>>trash IG has been shoveling our way (don't get me wrong, I'm talking
>>packaging here, not content).
>
>Could be an Illuminati Plot!
>(remember which company brought you such delights as pickeled FNORDS!<G>)

Or those naughty Templars....

>>I don't know about throwing out the stuff in MegaTraveller, but I'm all for
>>throwing TNE in the bin where it belongs (yes, it had cool stuff, but the
>>Virus concept stunk).
>
>>On an interesting side note it's release will mean that we will immediatly
>>have a number of cool supplements available to use!  Any GURPS Traveller GM
>>will have material available to throw at his poor players that has never
>>been considered for any Traveller supplement!

(Surveying the 40+ GURPS books on the shelf)  Yes, I have to agree that
this is indeed a good thing, simply because I can probably attract more
people to Traveller now.

>Not to mention all of Evil Stevies GURPS universes.  Portals to wierd 
>dimensions, alternate timelines, or even have the PC's take a few classes at 
>IOU!
>
>Finaly we learn the Grandfather is small potatoes, compared to the might of 
>Old Cthuluhu!  Muhahahahahaaaa!

Grandfather *is* Old Cthuluhu.  Templar Secret #3374576.

><The Commander's physician gives him a spray hypo of tranq>
>Sorry, years of demetia as a GM...

>>The only down side I see to this is that I don't remember seeing any really
>>great starship diagrams in any of the SJG products.

Starship diagrams, no.  But the Vehicles book is great for gearheads.

>>In any case this is the last best hope for Traveller!
>
>Is GURPS Traveller then, dare I say it...
>
>T5?
><The Commander Ducks>

I wouldn't say T5, but a weird mutant offshot of T4.
- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 05 Sep 1997 08:21:53 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: The Gateway Book - Replies to Various Comments (LONG)

At 02:24 AM 9/5/97 -0500, you wrote:

>Picture atop p. 32. . .I liked that picture.  Gave me some wierd ideas. 
>. . :)  Hey, I'm not saying that because they don't correspond to 
>specific real life weapons they are bad.  It's because they don't 
>correspond in their stats to the way their descriptions have them 
>working.  I know what a recoiless rifle does, how it works, and roughly 
>what should happen when you build one.  I also know that (with the 
>exception of the Carl Gustav, which fits in the LAAW category anyway) 
>RRs tend to be tripod mounted and treated more like artillery pieces.  
>LAAWs are unguided, with only the most rudimentary sights and are fired 
>from a man's shoulder.  They are inherently more innacurate.

The US still has a shoulder fired Recoiless Rifle in its inventory.. the
90mm.  Used only by the Ranger battalions these days, itis just to useful
to get rid of.  

>>This is one example only and you can't badmouth an entire product
>>based on this.  If you don't like it, change it.  Or you could contact
>>Greg Porter and politely ask why this is so.
>
>Oh, I've been taking a closer look and finding things that are... a 
>little wierd.  Take the ACR, RF-10.  To fit 250 rounds into a 1.1 kg 
>magazine requires rounds which weigh less than 3.9 grams.  The only way 
>I could come up, after spending all afternoon trying, is to make 5mm, 
>850 joule-rated ammunition.  Then to make a damage of 4, you need at 
>least 1350.5 joules of muzzle energy.  Which means you've got a really 
>long barrel. . . And then when I try to design a rapid fire weapon 
>around that cartridge, within the price constraints for the ACR, RF-10, 
>and achieving that muzzle velocity, I end up with a barrel that's 
>77.8cm long, and the weapon is underweight by .7 kg.  I'm trying to 
>imagine a automatic rifle that's got that long a barrel. . . it just 
>sounds wierd.  And the math don't add up.

OK, I whipped out the spreadshet and a 5mm, 3:1 sg11 round at 1229J weighs
3.6 grams.  1229J gives a 3G3 DV of 43, which is the minimum for T$ damage 4.

Building the weapon with an Autoburst reciever, I came up with a reciever
mass of 928g, and a base barrel length of 36.4cm.  The barrel weighed 982g
(I lengthened the barrel to 40cm).  Accesories came in at 418g.  The box
magazine containing 250 rounds weighed 1080g.

The loaded weight of the weapon I designed comes out to 3.4kg, with a
length of 46cm (the illustration shows a bullpup, so I didn't add a stock.)
 The only oddity is the price, since I come up with Cr 731 as opposed to
the 640 quoted in the book.

>>T4 does use a simpler combat system than TNE, yes, but T4 never has
>>claimed to "be" TNE.  I believe Marc is working on a new combat system
>>for T4.1, as is Douglas Berry & myself.
>
>Sounds interesting. . . 

It is.


- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1783
***********************************
yTraveller-digest     Friday, September 5 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1784



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: GURPS Traveller
TNE
Monetary Economics
Mining, core and ice
Re: Addaxur
Re: GURPS Traveller
Re: GrrrrrrrrPS
Re: Battle dress turtles  (was RE: Traveller-digest V1997
Re: GURPS Traveller announced....
Re: GURPS Trav (T-5?)
RE: Commerce and Trade in T4
Re: Economics Questions
Re: GURPS Traveller announced....
Re: GURPS Traveller
Re: Battle dress turtles  (was RE: Traveller-digest V1997  #1764
Manticore SDB
Maneuver Time to Jump Point
Re: GURPS Traveller announced....

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 09:11:26 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller

Frankly, I think this will pretty much doom IG. Given a limited number of
gaming dollars, which would most people rather purchase - a product with the
proofreading quality of FFS2 (let alone Starships)or a SJG product? 
I don't even like GURPS rules that much...but I'm likely to buy at least the
first GURPS Traveller book, and I haven't bought an IG product in a long time.

Bruce

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 12:33:50 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Macpherson <john35@wharton.upenn.edu>
Subject: TNE

"Zane H. Healy" <healyzh@ix.netcom.com> said:
> I don't know about throwing out the stuff in MegaTraveller, but I'm all for
> throwing TNE in the bin where it belongs
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
	And people wonder why us TNE folks feel the need to have our own 
mailing list.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 12:29:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Macpherson <john35@wharton.upenn.edu>
Subject: Monetary Economics

 
David Reed said: 
> On Thursday, September 04, 1997 15:32, Erwin Fritz wrote:
> > Now, I'm not an economist, so forgive me if this idea sounds stupid.
> 
> You're forgiven.  ;-)  I'm not an economist, either, 

	Well, I _am_ and economist :-)

	Inflation and deflation are actually very simple concepts and 
their functioning in the economy is well understood.

Example:
	Imagine an economy where the sum total of all goods are services 
available is 10 coconuts.  In this economy there are also $10 which are 
used as money. (You don't need money in an economy with only one good, 
but I'm trying to be simple).  There are $10 and 10 coconuts, so each 
dollar will be able to buy one coconut, and the price of a coconut will 
be one dollar.
	What happens if someone discovers $10 in the sand?  Now we have 
$20 and 10 coconuts.  The price of coconuts will be bid up to $2 and we 
have inflation.
	What happens if $5 gets washed out to sea?  Now we have $5 and 10 
coconuts.  The price of coconuts falls to .50c and we have deflation.

	Both inflation and deflation are bad, especially if unexpected.  
All the contracts, loans, price markings, etc. suddenly become out of 
whack.  When there's lots of unpredictable inflation or deflation in the 
economy it makes it difficult to plan ahead or make necessary 
investments. 
	What central banks need to do is keep the money supply matched up 
with the amount of goods in the economy.  If the economy is growing at 2% 
per annum, then the money supply should grow at 2% per annum.  This keeps 
price levels where they were.
	
Back to Traveller:
	In the 3I, I am sure there is a central bank which regulates the 
supply of Imperial credits.  Given the large time delays for information 
and trade, each sector bank probably has authority to increase or 
decrease the local money supply, as long as it coordinates with other 
sector banks and the imperial bank.
	I'd imagine that in the early days of Milieu Zero, there was no 
Imperial Credit.  Instead, people relied on the stablest currency 
available to them for interstellar trade.  This was probably the Sylean 
credit.  Individuals and companies began to use the Sylean credit as the 
basis of interstellar exchange.  Because of this, world governments held 
Sylean credits as their primary foreign exchange reserve, and even backed 
their currencies with it.  Eventually, the demand for Sylean credits 
outside Sylea made managing the Sylean currency and economy difficult.  
The imperial credit was created and the imperial bank came into being to 
manage it.

- -JM

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 18:54:37 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Tommy Grav <tommy.grav@astro.uio.no>
Subject: Mining, core and ice

Im developing a world and have a question about mining that I thought I
should throw out to you.

What type of minerals would be feasible to mine on a cold rock planet
orbiting a M3 main sequence star? Because of the low temperature I
envision a small community (20,000+) working underground in caves mining
something, but what? I also need it to be profitable to sent to a TL12 
heavly populated world two parsec away. Any ideas?

Some background perhaps. The system has no gas giants, only one rock
orbiting about 0.5AU out. The planet has a rotational periode around its
axis of 300 sederial years at a 5 degrees tilt from the ecliptic plane.
The planet is over 3000km in radius and with a density of 7864 grams per
cubic cm. Would this mean that the core would have to be molten or could
it be solid?

Its hydrosphere rating is 0, but with a mean temperature of -217 degrees
Celcius, no atmosphere, is there a possibility that there are some frozen
ice of any kind on the surface?

   


Tommy Grav                  tommy.grav@astro.uio.no    
Institute of Astrophysics   http://www.uio.no/~tommygr/
University in Oslo          "If you value your lives, be somwhere 
Norway                       else!" - Ambassador Delenn B5 

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 10:30:28 -0700
From: Chris Griffen <cgriffen@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: Addaxur

GypsyComet@aol.com wrote:

> While the Zhodani may have planted Sea Bears all over the place, they may
>not have done it for themselves. A significant percentage of the Consulate's
>population is non-Zhodani, dominated by the Addaxur ("six-legged
>carnivores"). The Sea Bear may be an addaxiform that is useful in some
>way. Several ideas come to mind:

What are the published resources on the Addaxur? I don't recall much
mention of them in AM4: Zhodani.

Best,

Chris Griffen

===================================================
Keeper of the Flame. Traveller player since 1980.

http://www.best.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: Fri, 05 Sep 1997 12:53:24 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Victor J. Raymond" <RAYMOND@macalester.edu>
Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller

 
Re: GURPS Traveller sinking IG.
 
I don't think so.  That certainly has not happened with White Wolf (who admittedly have a stronger customer base).
 
Aside from people deciding to play GURPS Traveller, I suspect that IG will be more than happy to take advantage of the subsequent rise in customers to sell them all sorts of Traveller adventures, etc.
 
Just my .02 credits.
 

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 13:02:49 -0500 (CDT)
From: jatkins6@ix.netcom.com (John Atkinson)
Subject: Re: GrrrrrrrrPS

You wrote: 

>But, then again, I guess it could be worse...
>
>Marc could have licensed out Trav to Palladium :)

That would be just cause to assasinate someone.  :)

John M. Atkinson

Moi?  Bad experiences with people who play Rifts?  Why do you ask?

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 13:45:43 -0500 (CDT)
From: jatkins6@ix.netcom.com (John Atkinson)
Subject: Re: Battle dress turtles  (was RE: Traveller-digest V1997

You wrote: 

>Hoo-rah!  Yes, it's much easier to go for the Medal of Honor when the 
only
>consequence of blowing it is that annoting keening hit whistle...
>
>I take it you're NG, what unit?

Bravo Company, 229 EN BN, 29th ID (L).

Although I'm trying to break the contract and go active. . . :)

>For pure defence units, trads can make some sense at TL12-13.  The 
savings
>in cost and power allow you to mount very powerful weapons, along with 

Hrm. . . I put together (using TNE FFS) a TL-12 grav tank mounting a 
12cm ETC main gun firing APFSDSSD.  Weighed 600 tons, but. . . :)

I'll try to whip together a tracked version and see what the difference 
is. . . 

John M. Atkinson

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 12:11:06 -0700
From: Chris Griffen <cgriffen@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller announced....

Charles Li wrote:

>    As the unfortunate TNE fan, according to GURPS Traveller, TNE will
>never have existed since Strephon survives and no virus occured.  So
>actually, TNE does not occur, let alone finish out, in the setting of
>GURPS Traveller.
>   Long live the Imperium!!!!!!!!

Fortunately, as a GURPS product, it is a variant of canonical Traveller.

From Marc's perspective, I guess it's a good business move. He's making the
most out of the property he owns. When Traveller was owned by a company,
GDW, it made less sense to farm out the license because they thought they
stood to lose more than they could gain.

From a longtime Traveller player's perspective, I find this scenario to be
a bit disconcerting. Never before has Traveller blatantly published a
setting that refuted something that had been published before. Until now,
the authors of the immense collaborative effort that is Traveller have
always respected and accommodated prior Traveller publications. With the
advent of GURPS Traveller, this is no longer the case.

So before all the anti-TNEers go crowing that this is how it should have
been all along, just remember, your setting has just as much chance of
becoming invalidated as the TNE setting has.

Best,

Chris Griffen

===================================================
Keeper of the Flame. Traveller player since 1980.

http://www.best.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: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 13:25:48 -0700 (PDT)
From: Craig Berry <cberry@cinenet.net>
Subject: Re: GURPS Trav (T-5?)

> Date: Fri, 05 Sep 1997 07:42:51 -0700
> From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
> 
> >Finaly we learn the Grandfather is small potatoes, compared to the might of 
> >Old Cthuluhu!  Muhahahahahaaaa!
> 
> Grandfather *is* Old Cthuluhu.  Templar Secret #3374576.

No, no, no.  Grandfather is *new* Cthulhu.  However, when he was
introduced, public reaction was very unfavorable, so the original was
returned to the market as Cthulhu Classic.  Don't even ask about the dark
inner mysteries of Diet Cthulhu, and (*shudder*) the legendary Cthulhu
Free...

> >>In any case this is the last best hope for Traveller!
> >
> >Is GURPS Traveller then, dare I say it...
> >
> >T5?
> ><The Commander Ducks>
> 
> I wouldn't say T5, but a weird mutant offshot of T4.

Speaking of Cthulhu, how about we emulate Mr. Bill and jump directly to
T6?

- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
   |   Craig Berry - cberry@cinenet.net
 --*--    Home Page: http://www.cinenet.net/users/cberry/home.html
   |      Member of The HTML Writers Guild: http://www.hwg.org/   
       "Every man and every woman is a star."

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 21:05:36 +0000 ()
From: kraehe@bakunin.hb.north.de (Michael Koehne)
Subject: RE: Commerce and Trade in T4

Moin David Reed,

> Would make for a great scenario...  How do you convince, say, a 
> Brazilian-type world not to print more money to pay debts exacerbated by 
> printing more money?

	a backwater world can print as much micky-mouses as they
	like. It would'nt affect the Imperial Solar. The Imperial
	Solar is imho a virtual currency defined and backed by
	interstellar trade. What do I mean with virtual currency ?

	I'm a member of "TauschRausch" a local exchange ring in
	Bremen. We are exchanging anythink. And for that we defined
	a virtual currency called "Tide". A Tide is 10 Minutes,
	regardless of what kind of work involved. So I would say
	the Solar is also a virtual currency defined as "1 kCr Solar
	equals 14qm over 1 parsec" regardless of local currencies.

> Fair profit is what the entrepreneur thinks it is.  How competitive is the 
> shipbuilding industry?  Or shipping?  Hmmm.  I hadn't thought about it, 
> but if you want a ship built, and are not a megacorp, you're pretty much 
> stuck with the local shipyard.  Thoughts?

	I would think that any shipyard in the 3I is subsidary as it
	is now in real world. Having a local shipyard means that you
	can build warships local. So any state has an interest in having
	an own shipyard. As there are now to many shipyards, prices
	will go down, and the most subsidary shipyard will receive
	contract.

By Michael
- -- 
	kraehe@bakunin.north.de			human.is-bremen.de/~kraehe
		  " ceterum censeo MSDOS esse delendam "

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 21:43:38 +0000 ()
From: kraehe@bakunin.hb.north.de (Michael Koehne)
Subject: Re: Economics Questions

Moin John Macpherson,

> 	This has long been a problem in Traveller economics.  As Ian
> points out, under Trav trading rules, a few trips between an Industrial
> and Ag world that happen to be near each other, and any trader is likely
> to get rich quick.

	its the referees job that this never happen, I prefer a group
	where any member has a problem next time they visit a main
	world because of bank payment. Any think else in not traveller
	but more D&D (tenders floating disk full of gold ;-)

> 	The cost of freight itself should not be the arbitrary 
> 1000Cr/ton. 

	the megacons dictate this price. and any free trader
	has trouble competing it.

> 	But back to the cost of freight.  The way to easily handle competitive 
> pressures in the game is to create a Competition Factor. 

	Nice idea for outside of the 3I.

> In perfectly competitive markets the CF=1.

	No the 1kCr/dt is artificial. there is no real trade competition
	inside the 3I. Perhaps the Kaneshi dosnt have fixed freight price,
	so shiping between Kaneshi and its satalites cost 1000K$ while the
	CF increase around.

> 	It should be noted that this is for the loan terms as described 
> in TNE.  I don't remember what they are in T4, so someone correct me if I 
> have these wrong: 20% down, 1/240th of ship price for 480 months.

	T4/Vol1-pp97 has the same value. I think that they are trade
	dictates of Cleon Industries.

> 	Actually, I'm sure there are lots of companies all over the 
> Imperium who do very much what you suggest -- they're called 
> import-export companies.  Shipping is a low risk, low return investment, 
> while speculative trading is a high risk, high return investment.

	This is the "real market" for free traders. In my campain
	30% of the passengers are free lance brokers or brokers
	of a medium sized company, and they always want :

	-Medium(30%)/high(50%) passage for a full trip.
	 Dictate (or discuss the trip) and rent 6d6 displacement
	 tons for the full trip. They often pay a bit more(50%)
	 than the usual 1kCr per dt*parsec, sometimes less(20%).

	Of couse those trips always go to the wilds as its cheaper
	to buy cargo space on a Liner inside the 3I.

> 	If you're looking for the secret to fabulous wealth in Trav, look
> no further than the refining of fuel for starships.

	Paying for refined fuel, is usual at any A-C starport,
	because its a kind of additional starport financing.
	On most of these systems you'll have several SDBs around
	the gas giants telling anybody thats forbidden to skim
	fuel here. While Liners often dont have a fuel purification
	plant for that reason, a FPP is a must for any free trader
	searchning for profit outside the 3I.

> But a plant at the starport could be run round the clock every day of
> the week, spreading the cost of the plant out over far more units of fuel.

	And how much does a starport cost ?

> Roughly in this order:  Information,
> luxury goods, electronics, capital goods, power plants, consumer durables,
> consumer goods, food, raw materials. 

	so we are first on this list ( Missing Link is a book im/exporter ;-)

- -- 
	kraehe@bakunin.north.de			human.is-bremen.de/~kraehe
		  " ceterum censeo MSDOS esse delendam "

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 05 Sep 1997 13:40:38 -0700
From: Evyn MacDude <wmacdude@Concentric.net>
Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller announced....

Harry wrote:
> 
> At 08:37 PM 4/09/97 -0700, you wrote:
> 
> >Cool tides Dudes, Now maybe will see it done right.
> >With alternate time lines, maybe we can see TNE finished out.
> 
> !!!! Sorry ??!!! Why exactly would you like to see an obviously superior
> system *finished out*. 

Err, answering my mail late at night. Meant more TNE stuff. By and away
my
favorite era.

> What exactly do you mean by that anyway? Please
> explain so that I can point out the error in your ways.

See above, Don't be so touchy.
- -- 
Evyn,
Warleader of the Clan MacDude
Yuppie Hunter of the Forgotten Surf
	Fortalice Desertum
	AD. 1997

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 6 Sep 1997 09:15:39 +0000
From: "Rupert Boleyn" <gtrupert@iconz.co.nz>
Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller

And to think that people find Virus an unrealistic idea! Here we a 
have an example of a good old fashioned paper RPG jumping systems and 
(presumeably) adapting, and I've no doubt that it will mutate because 
of its new environment, just as Virus does (did?). The question is, 
of course, what strain is it - Doomslayer? Puppeteer?

I'm not sure I'm too keen on it (I like TNE), but it's going to be 
interesting to look at, as while I thought  GURPS Space was a well 
made product I didn't like its 'feel'. I've never been too keen on 
the (probably realistic) way sci-fi weapons in GURPS will kill you 
from even the most minimal hit if you've no armour, but sometimes 
can't hurt you if you have your armour on - and that's not a 
Traveller thing  in any edition I've played (ie CT, MT, TNE). Besides 
I'm not sure I like the mostality rate GURPS seems to encourage, or 
the way the more powerful characters all seem to start out as 
escapees from an asylum.

R. Boleyn <gtrupert@iconz.co.nz>

TNE to the Core

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 6 Sep 1997 09:15:39 +0000
From: "Rupert Boleyn" <gtrupert@iconz.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Battle dress turtles  (was RE: Traveller-digest V1997  #1764

Douglas E. Berry wrote:

> >On Thu, 4 Sep 1997, John Atkinson wrote:
> >	IIRC T4 Emperor's Arsenal featured something called "BattlePods",
> >sort of fusion battledress/gravtank, with one soldier inside a 3-meter
> >long egg of superdense steel, bristling with FGMPs, lasers and missiles.
> >Despite T4s other shortcomings, I love the idea. Battledress is good for
> >TL 12-14, but gravitics is the way to enter TL 15+.
> 
> But you can't win "hearts and minds" from inside a battlepod.  Sure, the
> assult Marines might use them as mini tanks, but I'd wager that the
> majority of TL15 Marines will still being in "old fashioned" BD to take
> advantage of having your arms avalible for work.
> 
> Battlepods would probably be used as Marine Cavalry, racing about the
> battlefield providing shock effect at specific points, and reinforcing weak
> spots.

Has anyone thought up a way to home onto gravity disturbances, such 
as a CG/anti-grav (or whatever) unit? It just occured to me looking 
at this, because if you can then grav units will become special 
purpose only, with tracks for all the normal work.

Continuing on this vein any from of grav sensor (denitometers maybe?) 
would be able to pick up a formation of grav vehicles once they 
started thier CG's up, so tracked units might have an advantage 
there.

R. Boleyn <gtrupert@iconz.co.nz>

TNE to the Core

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 05 Sep 97 17:28:05 -0400
From: Lewis Roberts <lewis@chara.gsu.edu>
Subject: Manticore SDB

 Hi,
I designed a Manticore SDB as talked about in Battle Rider and
Challenge.  Since it is a modified Dragon SDB, I reversed engineered
the Dragon using Antti Lahtinen's spreadsheet.  I got it pretty close,
I came up with 1 Maintence personal, instead of two. The Maint points
were 204 instead of 203.  Both of these are most likely rounding
errors. The only significant difference was that the price was 10%
higher than the listed price.  Maybe the ships in BL got a 10%
discount, like mass produced ships used to?

One I had the basic Dragon, it was pretty simple to build the
Manticore. I designed a 800 Mj Meson gun, with Antti Lahtinen's
starship weapon spreadsheet. It doesn't come out exactly like the BR
stats, but John Macpherson said that the ships weren't actually
designed with FFS, but only approximated.  So I got as close as I could.

To make room for the gun, I removed the missiles, missile barbettes and
fuel purfication plant. The ship is very heavy and I couldn't
effectively use the remaining space, because it would push the ship
over the 15 ton rule. So I put in some extra cargo and a few extra
staterooms, since these have a very low density.  The new loaded mass
is 6200.5, which comes out to 15.50125, which rounds down to 15, so I
said it was good enough.  Normally when I use Antti's spreadsheet, I
use the exact ship density to calculate the thrust requirments, but
here I just used .71ton/m^3.  

If you look at the T4 stats, the weapons are totally pathetic, but that
is because they have a TNE short range of 2 hexes, but T4 requires all
weapons to be evaluated at sr=10 hexes, which is pretty artificial.  

Lewis Roberts
- --------------------------------------------------------
 

      The Reformation Coalition Navy(RCN) has completed negotiations
for the purchase of six Manticore-class system defense boats (SDBs)
from the Aubani Navy, with an option for more to follow. These vessels
are being purchased to give the RCN a battle rider capability when used
with Aurora or Maggort-class clippers. These SDBs are modified versions
of the standard Shukugon( Dragon) class TL-12 SDBs, manufactured for
centuries in the Last Imperium. The Manticores are distinguished from
the basic Dragons by the absence of the Drogon's missile barbettes and
fuel purification plant.These are replaced by a spinal meson gun which
gives the Manticore a powerful short-range punch, sufficient to disable
much larger vessels.

     The Monticores, which have been used up to now in the system
defense of Aubaine, will be used as "battle riders," carried into
combat one or two at a time by RCN clippers configured as "tenders."
The battle rider concept is an old one, and reflects a permanent
principle of interstellar combat. Given the fact that interstellar jump
driver and their supporting systems make significant demands on the
mass and volume of a starship, two spacecraft of equal size, one
equipped with jump drives, and one without, will demonstrate vastly
differing utilizations of space. The ship without jump drive will have
a great deal of additional space that can be allocated to weapons,
armor, defensive screens, fire control, ammunition, greater
maneuverability, and fuel, and will therefore be a better warship,
albeit unable to travel between star systems on its own. In a
confrontation between these two ships, the  nonjump-capable vessel
should beat the jump-capable starship every time. This fact is the
basis of the system defense boat. By extending this concept to include
large jump-capable ships which carry these nonjump capable warships
from star to star, the battle rider concept is born.

       The jump-capable ships. called tenders, carry several
nonjump-capable ships, called riders, or battle riders, into enemy star
systems. The battle riders detach and engage the enemy, and are
recovered by the tender following the battle. The drawback to the
battle rider concept  is the fact that a losing battle rider force has
a very hard time withdrawing, as battle riders cannot simply jump out
of the battle to a safe system.  The requirement to rejoin the large,
non-maneuverable, and poorly defended tender in order to escape creates
a vulnerability that ensures  that a defeated battle rider force is
usually annihilated, where as a defeated jump-capable force is usually
much less severely mauled.  

from Challenge #74
- ---------------------------------------------
General Data				
Displacement: 400 tons				Hull Armor: 101
Length: 60.59 meters				Volume: 5600 m3
Price: MCr 247				Target Size: S
Configuration: Streamlined Slab				Tech Level: 12
Mass (Loaded/Empty): 6200.5 / 5959.3				

Engineering Data				
Power Plant: 1085 MW Fusion Power Plant, 1 year duration (162.75 m3 fuel)
Jump Performance: None				
G-Rating: 4G HEPlaR (198.8 MW/G), Auxiliary High Efficiency CG (10 MW)
			
G-Turns: 112, 24.9 m3 fuel each				
Maint: 182				

Electronics				
Computer: 3xTL-12 Fibre-optic computer (0.8 MW)				
Commo: Maser (Unlimited; 0.6 MW), Radio (10 hex; 10 MW)
Avionics: Imaging EMS, IGS positioning, 160 km/h NOE
Sensors: AEMS (0.1 hex; 8 MW), PEMS (4 hex; 0.15 MW), 
ECM/ECCM: EM Masking (5.6 MW)
Controls: Bridge with 7 bridge workstations, 12 normal workstations

Armament
Offensive: 2x80 Mj Laser Turret (ROF=10)(2.2 MW; 1 crew),
               2:1/7-22 4:1/7-22 8:1/6-19 16:1/3-10
           800 Mj Spinal Meson Gun (ROF=100)(222.22 MW; 2 crew)
               2:141 4:71 8:35 16:18
Defensive: None
Master Fire Directors: 2xTL-12 (4 Diff Mods; 2 hex; 1.29 MW; 1 crew), 

Accommodations
Life Support: Extended (0.1428 MW), Gravitic Compensators (3.57 MW)
Crew: 25 (1xManeuver, 1xElectronics, 12xEngineer, 6xGunnery,
2xMaintenance, 3xCommand)
Crew Accommodations: 14xSmall Stateroom (0.5 kW)
Passengers: None
Passenger Accommodations: None					
			
Other Facilities: None						
		
Cargo: 140 m3 (10 tons), 1 Large Hatches			
					
Small Craft and Launch Facilities: None				
				
Air Locks: 4									

Notes									
Total Fuel Tankage: 2945.95 m3 (210.4 tons) 			
					
Fuel scoops (10% of ship surface), fills tanks in 1.32 hours	
							
									
10.4 MW power shortfall. When the spinal mount is fired, the radio
is usually not used.

- -------------------
T4 Starship Data						
Ship or Class Name and Type (Starship-V2)			
		
						
Tons: 400 (Slab SL)		Volume: 5600 m3		Cost: 246.983 MCr
Crew: 25			High/Mid Pass: 0	Low Pass: 0
Cargo: 10 tons			Controls: Fib(Bridge)	TL: 12

8 Size			0 Jump drive			
4 Fire Control		4 Maneuver (HEPlaR, 795.2 MW)			
			5.4 Power Plant (1085 MW)			
2x Laser 1-0-0-0	210.4 Fuel (Scoop 160)	(No Purification Plant)		
Meson 1-0-0-0		0 Meson Screen (0 MW)			
			0 Sandcasters (0 cans)			
			0 Nuclear Damper			
			0.1A 4P 0J Sensors/EM Masking			
			30 Armor, 14 Structure			

Crew: 1 Maneuver, 1 Electronics, 12 Engineer, 6 Gunnery, 2 Maintenance,
3 Command			
Accom: 14 small staterooms, 			
 

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 18:05:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Maneuver Time to Jump Point

This is the travel time to the safe jump distance from a world (based on
recent posts). Is it right?


TIME TO JUMP POINT (Standing Jump)
	UWP					Gs
	Size	Dia	100 dia	Bands		1	2	3	4	5	6	10	20	30
	1	1,600	160,000	3	2.2	1.6	1.3	1.1	1.0	0.9	0.7	0.5	0.4
	2	3,200	320,000	6	3.1	2.2	1.8	1.6	1.4	1.3	1.0	0.7	0.6
	3	4,800	480,000	10	3.8	2.7	2.2	1.9	1.7	1.6	1.2	0.9	0.7
	4	6,400	640,000	13	4.4	3.1	2.6	2.2	2.0	1.8	1.4	1.0	0.8
	5	8,000	800,000	16	5.0	3.5	2.9	2.5	2.2	2.0	1.6	1.1	0.9
	6	9,600	960,000	19	5.4	3.8	3.1	2.7	2.4	2.2	1.7	1.2	1.0
	7	11,200	1,120,000	22	5.9	4.2	3.4	2.9	2.6	2.4	1.9	1.3	1.1
	8	12,800	1,280,000	26	6.3	4.4	3.6	3.1	2.8	2.6	2.0	1.4	1.1
	9	14,400	1,440,000	29	6.7	4.7	3.8	3.3	3.0	2.7	2.1	1.5	1.2
	10	16,000	1,600,000	32	7.0	5.0	4.1	3.5	3.1	2.9	2.2	1.6	1.3
	11	17,600	1,760,000	35	7.4	5.2	4.3	3.7	3.3	3.0	2.3	1.6	1.3
	12	19,200	1,920,000	38	7.7	5.4	4.4	3.8	3.4	3.1	2.4	1.6	1.4
	Time in hours. Vessel begins at a zero velocity and arrives at jump point at
zero velocity.

TIME TO JUMP POINT (Running Jump)
	UWP					Gs
	Size	Dia	100 dia	Bands		1	2	3	4	5	6	10	20	30
	1	1,600-	160,000-	3	1.6	1.1	0.9	0.8	0.7	0.6	0.5	0.4	0.3
	2	3,200	320,000	6	2.2	1.6	1.3	1.1	1.0	0.9	0.7	0.5	0.4
	3	4,800	-480,000	10	2.7	1.9	1.6	1.4	1.2	1.1	0.9	0.6	0.5
	4	6,400-	640,000	13	3.1	2.2	1.8	1.6	1.4	1.3	1.0	0.7	0.6
	5	8,000-	800,000	16	3.5	2.5	2.0	1.8	1.6	1.4	1.1	0.8	0.6
	6	9,600-	960,000	19	3.8	2.7	2.2	1.9	1.7	1.6	1.2	0.9	0.7
	7	11,200-	1,120,000	22	4.2	2.9	2.4	2.1	1.9	1.7	1.3	0.9	0.8
	8	12,800-	1,280,000	26	4.4	3.1	2.6	2.2	2.0	1.8	1.4	1.0	0.8
	9	14,400-	1,440,000	29	4.7	3.3	2.7	2.4	2.1	1.9	1.5	1.1	0.9
	10	16,000-	1,600,000	32	5.0	3.5	2.9	2.5	2.2	2.0	1.6	1.2	1.0
	11	17,600-	1,760,000	35	5.2	3.7	3.0	2.6	2.3	2.1	1.6	1.2	1.0
	12	19,200-	1,920,000	38	5.4	3.8	3.1	2.7	2.4	2.2	1.7		
	Time in hours. Vessel begins at a zero velocity and arrives at jump point at
maximum velocity.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 05 Sep 1997 14:59:41 -0700
From: Scott Ellsworth <Scott_Ellsworth@alumni.hmc.edu>
Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller announced....

At 12:11 PM 9/5/97 -0700, Chris Griffen wrote:
>Charles Li wrote:

>>From a longtime Traveller player's perspective, I find this scenario to be
>a bit disconcerting. Never before has Traveller blatantly published a
>setting that refuted something that had been published before...

Save, perhaps, for the rather vocal group that feels that T4 has already
invalidated significant canon.  Admittedly, not quite to the extent that
just denying TNE's existence will do, but still...

>So before all the anti-TNEers go crowing that this is how it should have
>been all along, just remember, your setting has just as much chance of
>becoming invalidated as the TNE setting has.

I have a bad feeling that it either already has been, or will soon be.
Some parts of Traveller have some continuity problems, and there are not a
lot of companies paying out the cash to put it right.  There are certainly
individuals doing so, but they have not, in general, been published.
Whether this is because they have not submitted products, or that their
products did not meet the standards of who they were submitted to, I do not
know.

I do know that I have not turned some of my fixes into real results that
can be published.  Thus, not seeing my name in lights is because I have not
submitted anything.

Trying to fix the continuity problems, though, can feel pretty pointless,
when some new authors quite freely admit that they are not terribly
committed to previous statements.  Further, many doubt the need for a
consistent background, and still others do not see why even a subset of
past information staying is sacrosanct is important.

Hopefully, this situation will improve.  Certainly, if we see an increase
in production values and writing quality from the Gurps people, this may be
a good thing.  Even if it is our sacred cows that get slaughtered.

>Chris Griffen
>
>===================================================
>Keeper of the Flame. Traveller player since 1980.

Been playing since 79, myself, and I do think the game looks better now
than then.  There are problems with it, and parts of what I considered
"true and right" Traveller that have since been rejected, but at least the
game seems to have matured tremendously over time.

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

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1784
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Friday, September 5 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1785



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Jump in Traveller
Re: Mining, core and ice
Re: Battle dress turtles  (was RE: Traveller-digest V1997
Re: Battle dress turtles  (was RE: Traveller-digest V1997 #1764)
Re: Mining, core and ice
Range bands
Re: Ship Missions
GURPS Traveller
GURPs Traveller
Lorentz Force Steering
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1784
Re: TNE
Re: GURPS Trav (T-5?)
Re: GURPS Trav (T-5?)
Re: GURPS Traveller announced....

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 18:36:00 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Jump in Traveller

JUMPSPACE
Jump allows a ship to travel faster than the speed of light by entering
jumpspace. Ships in jumpspace are completely out of communication with the
common universe, or with other ship sin jumpspace.
	Jump Ranges. The jump drives for a ship determine how far it can jump. Jump
capacity can range from 1 to 6 (which is possible range in parsecs). A ship
can make a jump equal to or less than its jump capacity.
	Jump Time. All jumps take about a week: 168 hours plus or minus about 10%.
Time spent in jump has no relation to the distance travelled.
	Equivalent Speed. A ship which jumps one parsec in one week has travelled
170 times the speed of light.

	Jump	Equivalent
	1	  170 x speed of light
	2	  340
	3	  500
	4	  680
	5	  850
	6	1000

	In System Jumps. It is possible to jump within a star system: The jump takes
a week (168 hours or so). In some cases, the jump is more efficient than using maneuver drive.
	The 100 Diameter Sphere. Jump uses a straight line in calculating courses.
If that straight line intersects a 100 diameter sphere around an object, the
ship is "precipitated out" of jump space. It is an astrogator's job to plot a
course which avoids these pitfalls (Notice that this prevents a ship from
emerging from jump within another object).

TYPES OF JUMP
	Ships retain their speed and direction when they enter jump space and when
they emerge from jump.
`	Standing Jump. Standard practice is for ships to do a standing jump (jump
with zero velocity); it's safer.
	Running Jump. A ship could enter jump a high speed (called a running jump).
Upon emerging, it need only decelerate as it approaches the new world. If
poorly calculated, the ship is off course and will waste time maneuvering to
the world.
	Consequences. Imagine the risk involved if a ship misexits with a high
velocity directly toward the small object with no time to reach or maneuver,
a collision is inevitable.

 MISHAPS
	A failure of Astrogation causes a misexit.
	A drive failure or a jump from within 100 diameters causes a misjump.

MISJUMPS
	A misjump occurs when the drive fails during the initial jump process, or
when a jump is attempted within the 100 diameter sphere around a body.
	No Jump. The jump does not take place. The drive fails to engage. Everyone
involved knows immediately.
	Failed Jump. The ship enters jump space, but emerges (after about a week) in
the same place it started at.
	Misdirected Jump. The ship emerges from jump space in an unintended
location, usually far in distance and location from the intended exit point
(this result is different from a misexit). A Failed Jump and a Misdirected
Jump are indistinguishable before the ship exits jump space.

	2D	Direction	Distance
	2	1	0.5D
	3	2	1D
	4	2	1D
	5	3	2D
	6	3	2D
	7	4	3D
	8	4	3D
	9	5	4D
	10	5	4D
	11	6	5D
	12	6	5D
	Roll twice (once for each column).

	Disaster. The ship experienced a high level of damage (or is completely
destroyed).

	2D	Inside 100 Dia	Drive Failure	2	Failed Jump	No Jump
	3	Failed Jump	No Jump
	4	Failed Jump	No Jump
	5	No Jump	No Jump
	6	No Jump	No Jump
	7	No Jump	Failed
	8	No Jump	Failed
	9	Misdirected	Misdirected
	10	Misdirected	Misdirected
	11	Misdirected	Disaster
	12	Disaster	Disaster
	If inside 90 diameters, DM +2.
	If inside 50 diameters, DM +4.
	If inside 10 diameters, DM +6.
	DM - Engineer skill for primary engineer on the ship.
	If both Drive Failure and Inside 100 Diameters, roll on both columns and use
the worst result.

MISEXITS
	A ship which fails its astrogation task misexits jump. It emerges at a
random location between the start point and the intended destination.
	Near A World. The ship has exited near a world or gas giant in the intended
star system. (It would take a really bad astrogator to make the ship exit
near a world or gas giant in the beginning system).
	In Deep Space. The ship has exited near a solitary world (or a comet, or an
odd chunk of rock) in deep space between major systems.

TIME TO BREAKOUT
	A typical jump takes about a week (168 hours). The actual time spent is
random. Military ships can take slightly less time on average.
	Squadron Maneuvers. Highly tuned drives in a squadron of ships, along with
highly trained crews can make their emergence from jump very close to the
same time (within a 5 hour window).

	D-D	Comm	Mil	T&T	Perfect
	-5	158	162	163.5	165.0
	-4	160	163	164.0	165.2
	-3	162	164	164.5	165.4
	-2	164	165	165.0	165.6
	-1	166	166	165.5	165.8
	0	168	167	166.0	166.0
	1	170	168	166.5	166.2
	2	172	169	167.0	166.4
	3	174	170	167.5	166.6
	4	176	171	168.0	166.8
	5	178	172	168.5	167.0
	Comm: Commercial and private ships using standard drives.
	Mil. Military ships in service.
	T&T. Trained and tuned. Military ships with highly trained crews and
carefully tuned drives.
	Perfect. If the rolls produce a perfect jump +/- 0, reroll on the Perfect
column.



DETECTION
	Ships entering and leaving jump space can be detected.
	Entering Jump: A ship entering jump disappears from detector screens. There
is a pulse of energy which is detectable to PRadar.
	In Jump: A ship in jump cannot be detected.
	Leaving Jump. A ship leaving jump emits a pulse of energy which is
detectable to PRadar.

ASTROGATION
	The Astrogator=92s responsibility is to determine a usable course and to plot
it with the help of the ship=92s computer. All calculation takes place before
the jump begins.
	Commercial Ship Astrogation. The course is plotted for a standing jump which
will emerge at 100 diameters from the destination world.
	Complex Astrogation. The course is plotted for a running jump which will
emerge with the ship at full speed aimed at the destination world (and the
ship then decelerates all the way to the destination world).

To plot a Standing Jump
Edu + Astrogation < Easy (1D)

To plot a Running Jump
Edu + Astrogation < Difficult (2.5D)



Marc

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 17:46:46 -0500 (CDT)
From: Joseph "Chepe" Lockett <jlockett@io.com>
Subject: Re: Mining, core and ice

Quoth Tommy Grav:
> What type of minerals would be feasible to mine on a cold rock planet
> orbiting a M3 main sequence star?

Warning: I bailed out of Space Physics junior year in college, and
graduated an English major.  So, while I can talk a good line, I might
miss something along the way.  :-)

If the star is main-sequence, you should be able to place any type of
deposits that you like on the world.  The only worry would be if the star
were Population-II (old and metal-poor) rather than Population-I (like our
Sun and most of its neighbors).  We could easily get into the ancient TML
debate of "canon and feel" vs. "fusion power and high-volume mass
spectrographs allow recycling and make mining obsolete," but I figure you
don't want a reprise of that....

Lanthanum is an old stand-by, of course.  Precious metals are probably
still commodities.  Or maybe the world is just one big marble quarry?

> The planet is over 3000km in radius and with a density of 7864 grams per
> cubic cm. Would this mean that the core would have to be molten or could
> it be solid?

That's a small world, roughly Mars-size, and like Mars probably cooled off
fast due to surface-volume ratios.  The core is probably solid.  Heck,
maybe they've drilled all the way there for some wacky reason (any
geologists here want to speculate on a Super-MoHole?)

> Its hydrosphere rating is 0, but with a mean temperature of -217 degrees
> Celcius, no atmosphere, is there a possibility that there are some frozen
> ice of any kind on the surface?

Sure.  Again, use our "known" models.  Smaller worlds (Galilean
satellites, etc.) in similar temperature ranges have icy surfaces.
So if it works for the adventure, put 'em on in.

- ----------------------------*------------------------*------------------------
 Joseph L. "Chepe" Lockett  |"Nullum magnum ingenium | GURPS fan, Amiga user,
http://www.io.com/~jlockett | sine mixtura dementiae | Shakespearean scholar,
  Email: jlockett@io.com    | fuit." -- Seneca       | actor and director.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 14:39:22 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Battle dress turtles  (was RE: Traveller-digest V1997

In mail you write:

> You wrote: 
>
>>But you can't win "hearts and minds" from inside a battlepod.  Sure, 
>
> Every time I hear that phrase, I just cringe. . . You don't want to win 
> hearts and minds.  You want to take and hold ground.

Old quote from a Nam vet:

"Once you've got them by the balls, their hearts and minds will follow."

Cynical, but it makes a point...
- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 14:41:45 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Battle dress turtles  (was RE: Traveller-digest V1997 #1764)

In mail you write:

>>You misunderstand me, my good sir.  I'm a Lightfighter on weekends, so 
>>I'm passingly familliar with the argument that tanks are too easy to 
>>kill for the money spent on them.  I believe it, after AT this summer.  
>>To easy to get too close to to vehicles in laager, toss a satchel 
>>charge onto it, and run like hell.  At least on a MILES battlefield.  
>>Dunno if I'd volunteer for that detail if the lead were real.
>
> Hoo-rah!  Yes, it's much easier to go for the Medal of Honor when the only
> consequence of blowing it is that annoting keening hit whistle...

On the other hand, in "real life", you *really* want to get rid of the
tanks before they get rid of you...

>>But my point was, if you can build grav tanks, why would you want 
>>anything with treads?  If you're using treads in a low-cost militia 
>>unit, you can't afford battlearmor either, likely.  So battlearmor and 
>>treads will almost never coexist.  So the reason to get out of a tank 
>>while wearing battle armor given as 'maybe you threw a tread' is kinda. 
>>. . iffy.  :)
>
> For pure defence units, trads can make some sense at TL12-13.  The savings
> in cost and power allow you to mount very powerful weapons, along with the
> fire control to force the grav vehicles into terrain-hugging flight at a
> great distance.  This destroys their mobility advantage early.
>
> A mixed force of traditional treaded tanks, fast grav cavalry, and infantry
> could make life extremely difficult for an invader.

One *big* advantage of tracks over grav is that I'm pretty certain that
a powered up grav vehicle stands out like a sore thumb on gravitic
sensors (say an advanced mass detector). 

That means that all else being equal, grav vehicles are easier to spot.

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 14:58:09 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Mining, core and ice

In mail you write:

> Some background perhaps. The system has no gas giants, only one rock
> orbiting about 0.5AU out. The planet has a rotational periode around its
> axis of 300 sederial years at a 5 degrees tilt from the ecliptic plane.
> The planet is over 3000km in radius and with a density of 7864 grams per
> cubic cm. Would this mean that the core would have to be molten or could
> it be solid?

You'd better re-check that density figure. That's 1000 times as dense
as iron. Let's assume you mean 7.864 gm/cm^3

7.864 gm/cm^3 is about the density of iron, so the world is fairly
dense. It'd likely be rich in heavy metals.

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 14:22:57 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Range bands

Just for the heck of it, I took Marc's range bands and "rationalized"
them. So they are multiples of ten all the way up. I thought the
results might be interesting to some folks.

                meters      km        AU    Light year  parsec  
    a          5.00      5.00E-03  3.34E-11  5.29E-16  1.62E-16 
    b          5.00E+01  5.00E-02  3.34E-10  5.29E-15  1.62E-15 
    c          5.00E+02  5.00E-01  3.34E-09  5.29E-14  1.62E-14 
    d          5.00E+03  5.00      3.34E-08  5.29E-13  1.62E-13 
    e          5.00E+04  5.00E+01  3.34E-07  5.29E-12  1.62E-12 
    f          5.00E+05  5.00E+02  3.34E-06  5.29E-11  1.62E-11 
    g          5.00E+06  5.00E+03  3.34E-05  5.29E-10  1.62E-10 
    h          5.00E+07  5.00E+04  3.34E-04  5.29E-09  1.62E-09 
    i          5.00E+08  5.00E+05  3.34E-03  5.29E-08  1.62E-08 
    j          5.00E+09  5.00E+06  3.34E-02  5.29E-07  1.62E-07 
    k          5.00E+10  5.00E+07  3.34E-01  5.29E-06  1.62E-06 
    l          5.00E+11  5.00E+08  3.34      5.29E-05  1.62E-05 
    m          5.00E+12  5.00E+09  3.34E+01  5.29E-04  1.62E-04 
    n          5.00E+13  5.00E+10  3.34E+02  5.29E-03  1.62E-03 
    o          5.00E+14  5.00E+11  3.34E+03  5.29E-02  1.62E-02 
    p          5.00E+15  5.00E+12  3.34E+04  5.29E-01  1.62E-01 
    q          5.00E+16  5.00E+13  3.34E+05  5.29      1.62     
    r          5.00E+17  5.00E+14  3.34E+06  5.29E+01  1.62E+01 
    s          5.00E+18  5.00E+15  3.34E+07  5.29E+02  1.62E+02 
    t          5.00E+19  5.00E+16  3.34E+08  5.29E+03  1.62E+03 
    u          5.00E+20  5.00E+17  3.34E+09  5.29E+04  1.62E+04 
    v          5.00E+21  5.00E+18  3.34E+10  5.29E+05  1.62E+05 
    w          5.00E+22  5.00E+19  3.34E+11  5.29E+06  1.62E+06 
    x          5.00E+23  5.00E+20  3.34E+12  5.29E+07  1.62E+07 
    y          5.00E+24  5.00E+21  3.34E+13  5.29E+08  1.62E+08 
    z          5.00E+25  5.00E+22  3.34E+14  5.29E+09  1.62E+09 

I don't think we need any range bands past z, as 1.6 gigaparsecs is
getting pretty close to the Hubble limit. :-)

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 05 Sep 1997 19:57:23 -0400
From: Daniel Ray Lane <drlane@pinn.net>
Subject: Re: Ship Missions

Richard Hough wrote:
> 
> > I am trying to fill out a table for ship design detailing various ship
> > missions.
> >
> > Column 1 is the basic mission. Column 2 is a mission modifier.
> >
> > Does anyone care to make some suggestions?
> >
> > SHIP MISSIONS
> > Code  Basic      Alternate  Alternate  Armament   Suffix    Suffix
> >-----  ---------  ---------  ---------  ---------  --------  --------
> > A     Auxiliary  Assault    Attack                Ablatant  Armored
> > B     Battle                                      B Globe
> > C     Cruiser    Corvette                         C-PAW
> > D     Destroyer                        Driver     Damper    Drop
> >
> > E     Escort     Explorer                         EM
> > F     Frigate    Fighter                          Fusion
> > G     Gig                                         Gravitic
> > H     Fueler                                      HEPlaR    Heavy
> > I     Intruder                                    Insertion Imperial
> [snip]
> 
> Excuse my impertinence, but what exactly is the purpose of this table? Is
> it used for creating missions for players? For rolling random encounters?
> For describing missions ships are on? Is it part of the ship's registry?
> What?
> 
> Suppose my players are in a 100 dton reserve scout and are currently
> hauling commercial cargo; are they a Reserve Scout (RS, or whatever),
> Comercial Explorer, Speculative Trader, or what? Why would they care? Do
> they have to get registered for a particular mission? What if the mission
> changes during the expedition? Who says what a ship's mission is and how do
> they check it? I'm not saying the table is bad, I just don't see what it's
> for.
> 
> --
> Richard Hough
> rdhough@orca.bc.ca

Why, that's my stuff (IRT Marc's post) you're impertinizing!  :)

Actually, the codes in this admittedly largish table are an expansion
of the current ship designators used that are found in the US and 
other navies.  They are specific to individual navies, and I am
not aware of commercial services using them.  

Basically, they provide a quick way of identifying the principal
use of a ship (but they don't directly state what that mission is.)
They also give a quick picture of how large it is, how it is armed,
powered, armed.

For example, most sailors know that an "FFG" is:

	A fast frigate (FF)
	Armed with guided missiles (G)
	Gas Turbine powered 
	Small (~4000 tons displacement-conventional/not Traveller)
	Lightly amrored (i.e. NOT armored)
	Lightly armed
	Capable of doing Anti Air/Anti Surface/ and Anti-Sub warfare
		all equally poorly

On the other hand, an "SSN 21" is:

	A submarine (SS)
	Nuclear powered (by and advanced new reactor plant)
	Medium-Largish in displacement
	Very, very fast
	Heavily armed
	Capable of destroying anything that floats with one shot (easily)

	Essentially an underwater battleship.

Besides.  "Missions" do change based on the fancy of politicians.  Back in
the late 70's and early 80's, all of the Virginia class CGNs were designated
as "DLGNs" (Destroyer Leader Guided Nuclear).  The navy renamed/redesignated
these superdestroyers as "cruisers."  They did this since these were capital
ships at the time and the last "true cruiser," the Long Beach, was a 
one of a kind ship. Politically, the Navy felt it needed more cruisers.

The Soviets redesignated the Kirov class CGNs from Battlecruisers to
Cruisers so they wouldn't violate the treaty they hold with the Turks
over the Bosporus when these warships passed through.

Anyway, its a nifty and real little tool for folks who like to classify
stuff so they don't have to remember as much. (Like us Navy types).

- -Dan Lane

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 20:26:01 -0400 (EDT)
From: GDWGAMES@aol.com
Subject: GURPS Traveller

Gurps Traveller is not really T5...I would call it T IV : )

> This is of obvious interest to me and the other small GURPS cabal here on
> TML.  I'm not sure how I feel about the alternate timeline deal, but it
> should be interesting.  

Would this "small GURPS cabal" please get in touch with me? I have a few
questions of a technical nature to ask (and a sneaky suspicion that my work
for the next few weeks is cut out for me).

Loren Wiseman 

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 17:17:03 -0700
From: scharlto@ifsna.com
Subject: GURPs Traveller

GURPS Traveller Likes and Dislikes

Likes
- -------
*Copy-Editing
*Good retail shelf-exposure
*Steve Jackson Games seems willing to slow down production schedules to get
the product right
*Loren is back!

Dislikes
- ---------
*GURPS system (actually, more of a utter loathing hatred than a dislike;
"Generic" game systems try to please everybody, and in too many cases fail,
IMHO)
*Steve Jackson Games internal artwork actually makes the TNE artwork look good
*The technology in GURPs Space would be a poor fit to a Traveller universe
(only a dislike if SJG tries to port that technology to Traveller)

Concerns
- -------------
My main concern is the setting.  My Traveller campaign (using TNE rules)
did not go the Virus route, but I did keep the Rebellion as an important
background element.  While the loss of the Virus is not too upsetting to
me, the loss of the grand-scale conflicts and struggles of the Rebellion
will be a loss.  Yes, the non-Rebellion universe has plenty of
possibilities to chose from, and I could easily run a campaign there for a
long time.  HOWEVER, I think that new players are attracted by the ideas of
conflict and struggle, and the Rebellion offered that in spades.

Outcome
- -------------
I'll likely buy the GURPs Traveller material, if only because Marc and
Loren are involved in it.  It is unlikely I will use any of it, but since
I've not actually seen it yet, I can't say that for a fact.  Most likely I
will continue to use the TNE rules system and the Rebellion background.

Steve Charlton

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 05 Sep 1997 20:28:29 -0400
From: Daniel Ray Lane <drlane@pinn.net>
Subject: Lorentz Force Steering

> accomplish the same thing...but I'd hate to depend on that if it were
> used as a defensive measure.
> 
> Anyway, just a comment.
> 

Possibly.  Perhaps a charge could be imparted prior to the misiles launch as
a "plate' of a capacitor type assembly.  Perhaps the
steering would be accomplished by the missile generating an magnetic 
field and interacting with background fields to steer. One might
imagine an anlog to present aerodynamic steering with the exception
that the "air" medium is actually the charged particle environment
of the interplanetary medium and the magnetic fields generated by the
missile are the steering mechnaism acting on those charges.

Anyone happen to know if the Solar wind is neutral (on a volume basis)
or does it carry a net charge?

IIRC, I believe Robert Forward proposed a mechanism similar to this for 
steering Starwisps

- -Dan Lane

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 06 Sep 1997 00:37:00 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1784

On Fri, 5 Sep 1997 18:18:59 -0400, you wrote:

>Date: Fri, 05 Sep 1997 12:53:24 -0500 (CDT)
>From: "Victor J. Raymond" <RAYMOND@macalester.edu>
>Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller
>
> 
>Re: GURPS Traveller sinking IG.
> 
>I don't think so.  That certainly has not happened with White Wolf (who admittedly have a stronger customer base).
> 
>Aside from people deciding to play GURPS Traveller, I suspect that IG will be more than happy to take advantage of the subsequent rise in customers to sell them all sorts of Traveller adventures, etc.
> 
>Just my .02 credits.

But remember, SJG had a White Wolf license -- until White Wolf pulled it for no
better reason than the SJG products were superior (better proofreading,
graphics, playtesting etc.) and they were evidently worried (perhaps with no
real reason -- I don't have any figures, obviously!) that there were (or would
soon be) losing sales *themselves* as people bought the superior SJG products.

I would be *very* afraid that this is exactly what will happen with GURPS
Traveller -- SJG will be *too* successful, and will have their license "pulled"
in order to protect IG's inferior products.

Phil

- ---------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU)
Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)
Designer, Standard Role Playing (PGD)

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 17:50:42 -0700
From: Chris Griffen <cgriffen@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: TNE

>"Zane H. Healy" <healyzh@ix.netcom.com> said:
>> I don't know about throwing out the stuff in MegaTraveller, but I'm all for
>> throwing TNE in the bin where it belongs
>  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>	And people wonder why us TNE folks feel the need to have our own
>mailing list.

Zane,

Have you ever even played TNE? From your statement, I'm led to believe you
haven't.

Best,

Chris Griffen

===================================================
Keeper of the Flame. Traveller player since 1980.

http://www.best.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: Sat, 06 Sep 1997 02:00:20 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: GURPS Trav (T-5?)

On Fri, 5 Sep 1997 13:25:48 -0700 (PDT), Craig Berry wrote:

> Speaking of Cthulhu, how about we emulate Mr. Bill and jump directly to
> T6?

Don't you mean T'98?

James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 19:04:51 -0800
From: "Zane H. Healy" <healyzh@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: GURPS Trav (T-5?)

>Not to mention all of Evil Stevies GURPS universes.  Portals to wierd
>dimensions, alternate timelines, or even have the PC's take a few classes at
>IOU!

My point exactly!  This is enought to get me wanting to start up a GURPS
campaign right now.  I'm also one of the people with a row of GURPS books,
but I've only used them for ideas.

>3G^3 has weapon conversions for both TNE and T4 and GURPS.  IIRC they even
>had coversions to CT and MT in previous editions.  This is mearly

Ack, I keep forgetting I've got the original two books somewhere, yes, it's
got the CT/MT stuff in it.

>>In any case this is the last best hope for Traveller!
>
>Is GURPS Traveller then, dare I say it...
>
>T5?
><The Commander Ducks>

ROTFL, good comeback to a bad pun, I'm glad one person seems to have got
it, didn't think it was that obscure!

			Zane


| Zane H. Healy                    | UNIX Systems Adminstrator |
| healyzh@ix.netcom.com (primary)  | Linux Enthusiast          |
| healyzh@holonet.net (alternate)  | Mac Programmer            |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------+
| For Empire of the Petal Throne and Traveller Role Playing,   |
| and the collecting of Classic Computers with info on them.   |
| see http://www.dragonfire.net/~healyzh/                      |

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 05 Sep 1997 22:46:09 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller announced....

Evyn MacDude writes:

>Joseph Chepe Lockett wrote:
>> 
>> This is of obvious interest to me and the other small GURPS cabal here on
>> TML.  I'm not sure how I feel about the alternate timeline deal, but it
>> should be interesting.  And maybe SJG can show IG a thing or two about
>> product proofing and presentation....
>
>Cool tides Dudes, Now maybe will see it done right.
>With alternate time lines, maybe we can see TNE finished out.

   <Harold opens his war closet which contains his collection of long
knives, warhammers, gaunlets, and his trusty Scottish claymore>

   Gee and I just had all these sharpened too...

   Look, gloat if you must, but this doesn't mean anything any better
than when IG took over the publishing rights.  Besides setting up the
*mother* of all TML wars as the GURPS Traveller people and their CT
allies fight it out with MTers, TNEers, and an assortment of canonists,
you have the whole issue of GURPS Traveller and Marc Miller's Traveller
fighting it out for shelf space at a game store near you.  Oh sure, I
know what some have said about the two lines complimenting each other,
but that's just plain rubbish.  Unless SJG plans an extremely limited
run of Traveller materials (say a couple or three sourcebooks), in the
end you'll have GURPS Traveller or nothing.

   I hope I'm wrong, but....

Regards,

Harold

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1785
***********************************
Traveller-digest    Saturday, September 6 1997    Volume 1997 : Number 1786



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Economics Questions
Re: GURPS Traveller announced....
CT, Mega, TNE, T4, and then GURPS
Re: GURPS Traveller 
Re: Jump in Traveller
Re: GURPs Traveller
re: Jump in Traveller
Re: GURPs Traveller
Mining, core and ice
Re: Maneuver Time to Jump Point
Re: Jump in Traveller
Re: GURPS Traveller
Re: Battle dress turtles
Re: Economics Questions
Re: GrrrrrrrrPS

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 05 Sep 97 21:18:29 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: Economics Questions

> Roughly in this order:  Information, luxury goods, electronics,
> capital goods, power plants, consumer durables, consumer goods,
> food, raw materials.

I don't disagree with your items or their rough order, but the details will
depend on where the trade is taking place.  In my games the PC's do most of
their trading outside "civilized" space where their ship is one of very few
to be plying the spaceways.  As exploritory traders virtually *anything*
might be a good trade item...or a bad trade item. They travel among dozens
of governmental systems ranging from single systems to a few systems where
laws, mores, and tastes can be radically different.

About Information...I've always had a little problem with it as a viable
trade item.  Why wouldn't you transport ONE copy of the information and
duplicate it at the target world?  In many cases, it would be much cheaper
to duplicate the information on-site.

Of course, information providers will try to protect their intellectual
property.  I'm sure there will be licensing fees for duplication and
copy-protection schemes just as we have them today, but just how effective
will they be?  

Arvie Marchant can pick up the new "who-done-it", the latest video game and
a suite of process control programs...for his own personal use, of
course...duplicate and sell the copies at the next system down the main.
Inside a single governmental unit this is certainly illegal, but if the
system down the main is in a different government then...there's no telling
what might be legal. 

Personally, I'm afraid when it comes to information (and that means
software too, of course) it might border on impossible to prevent
wide-spread "unlicensed" distribution.  Import and Export taxes are likely
to be the rule with "smugglers and custom agents" much more common a plot
than anything else. ;->


Eris
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 05 Sep 1997 23:09:51 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller announced....

Zane H. Healy writes:

>Why does this sound like "Sweetpea Entertainment" is looking for someone
>that can do Traveller justice?  Maybe we aren't the only one sick of the
>trash IG has been shoveling our way (don't get me wrong, I'm talking
>packaging here, not content).

   As IG and Sweetpea Entertainment are one and the same company, those
"looking for someone that can do Traveller justice" may not be 'we' but
'he'...

>I don't know about throwing out the stuff in MegaTraveller, but I'm all for
>throwing TNE in the bin where it belongs (yes, it had cool stuff, but the
>Virus concept stunk).

   <Harold raises his claymore>  Nah, you're not worth chancing dulling
my blade.  

   The insensitivity and ignorance of your remark speaks for itself.

>On an interesting side note it's release will mean that we will immediatly
>have a number of cool supplements available to use!  Any GURPS Traveller GM
>will have material available to throw at his poor players that has never
>been considered for any Traveller supplement!

   Material that, if it is profilic enough, will force IG out of the
gaming business.  People expecting synergy out of this arrangement are
going to be gravely disappointed IMHO.

>In any case this is the last best hope for Traveller!

   If what you want is a GURPed version of the game that ignores the
next 80 or so of canon history.

   Zane must be a reincarnation of a Roman senator who saw the Visigoths
coming over the hill at Adrianople and said, "cool, tourists!"

- -- Harold

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 23:24:19 -0400
From: "Daniel Poulin" <pould@netcom.ca>
Subject: CT, Mega, TNE, T4, and then GURPS

Here are a few of my thoughts, not in order and just thrown on paper
concerning the news we just heard (or read in this case)

It is a very surprising news (although there had been rumours in the past).
 In fact, I remember some rumours before T4.  Although I don't like the
Gurps system (it is a horrible system, especially for combat - they can
last for hours!!!!(especially if the two players have armour)), I am ready
to try out the products (at least for the background, which is the most
important I guess).  I must admit I have been using different systems in
the past (T4 for character generation, Mega for combat rules and task
resolution, and TNE for Technology), a new one doesn't really scare me,
especially if I don't use it :-).  None of the system since Megatraveller
has really pleased me very much but a combination of all of them came very
close.  I am an old Traveller player (I remember the black books - you know
the ones that are broken through on the cover of TNE) and one that thought
that the best edition of Traveller was MegaTraveller.

The two systems (all Traveller versions (well, exclude TNE) vs GURPS) are
completely different.  One is a character generation system (it ensures
that no two characters are alike) while the other one is a character
creation system (players have a tendency to reproduce the same character
time after time).   If you give the same stats to four players and make
them roll characters from the same carreer in Traveller, they will all end
up with different characters and even, considering aging rolls, different
stats at the end.  This is not the case with GURPS where players can
reproduce the same character time after time.  Also, GURPS is a system
prone to abuse.  Some experienced players will always succeed in getting
the most out of every points.  Some advantages are horrible for game
balance (Eidetic memory at 60 points is an example: never, ever, let your
player take it).

Therefore, I was hoping that, if SJG was to licence Traveller, the same
thing that happened with In Nomine would happen again (i.e. a different
system than Gurps).  Although (for In Nomine) there is a difference between
the original french version of the game and the SJG version, the latter is
still a great game with a system that is not GURPS.

On the other hand, the quality of the products coming out of SJG is
undeniable.  The covers of the books are always good and the information
therein fantastic (I refer regularly to the China or Aztec books for
historical information).  SJG is not yet suffering from the same curse that
affected GDW (and now IG) errors in every book produced <grin>.  While I
think the artwork in MegaTraveller has not been beaten yet, the artwork of
SJG is still better than any book for T4.

Once again, I must say that I will probably use the GURPS products for
background (which means SJG makes one sale which is probably what they are
looking for in the first place) but I will ignore the system (although I do
use it once in a while: I am running a Gurps swashbucklers scenario
(musketteers) in a convention in Ottawa next week).  I wish I had a copy of
the musketteers game that was produced by GDW a long time ago.

I find sad that the rebellion won't be used as a background.  That means
that Norris and everything he represents for the Spinward Marches (you have
to admit that the man is bigger than life and a great hero to have in a
campaign) will not happen.  No democratic reforms for the Regency (there
will be no regency).  The possibility for adventuring in a fractured
imperium will disappear (the cloak and dagger kind of adventure).  The
solomani will again become a ridiculous racist race (the rebellion gave a
new perspective on them with some hope for their society).  The Rebellion
was bigger than life, it forced players to ask moral questions about their
presence in the universe of Traveller.  It also allowed for major
surprises: Margaret and slavery (she at first appeared to be the one to
restore the Imperium, she turned out to be quite scummy), the true nature
of Dulinor (he professed to be the savior of the common man, he only wanted
power), the lunacy of Lucan, the survival of Strephon  (maybe you should
take it fromt there: Strephon is proven to be alive by IRIS and has Lucan
executed).

I never liked the TNE background (I though that Virus, while a good idea,
was one that was badly implemented: the time period for the recovery was
way too short for long lived races (Vilani or Vegans) to be truly affected,
notwithstanding what the Traveller Chronicle says.), on the other hand it
gave us the Regency and the Reformation Coalition.  On the other hand, TNE
also gave us FF&S (the original one, the only good one).

It is now time to conclude this e-mail.  I congratulate you, Marc and
Loren, on what appears to be a good deal (I assume you have enough
financial intelligence to have done a good one).  I hope that this will
have positive effects on Traveller (more positive that T4 has been).  You
have a very dedicated (sometime vocal) following that, although very
critical, seem ready to provide support for your initiative.  I hope that
the products that will be generated by SJG will help us (players and GMs)
to continue supporting the game.  I have supported Traveller through its
many incarnations (even though I liked one more that the others) and I will
continue my support (I must say however that some products I refuse to buy
because of their poor quality: Starships and First Survey are examples). 
One last word: any hope of SJG getting 2300 or Dark Conspiracy ;-)

Daniel Poulin
pould@netcom.ca

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 23:50:04 -0400
From: "John Watts" <jwatts@catt.com>
Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller 

>I don't think so.  That certainly has not happened with White Wolf (who
>admittedly have a stronger customer base).

True, however ( even though I dislike their products ) WW tends to know
that customer base and attempt to satisfy that base.  Also, their products
are not rife with the sort of errors the IG products have.



It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion.
It is by the beans of Java that my thoughts acquire speed.
My hands begin to shake.  The shakes are a warning.
It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 06 Sep 1997 03:45:46 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: Jump in Traveller

On Fri, 5 Sep 1997 18:36:00 -0400 (EDT), CardSharks@aol.com wrote:

> MISJUMPS
> 	A misjump occurs when the drive fails during the initial jump process, or
> when a jump is attempted within the 100 diameter sphere around a body.
> 	No Jump. The jump does not take place. The drive fails to engage. Everyone
> involved knows immediately.
> 	Failed Jump. The ship enters jump space, but emerges (after about a week) in
> the same place it started at.
> 	Misdirected Jump. The ship emerges from jump space in an unintended
> location, usually far in distance and location from the intended exit point
> (this result is different from a misexit). A Failed Jump and a Misdirected
> Jump are indistinguishable before the ship exits jump space.
> 
> 	2D	Direction	Distance
> 	2	1	0.5D
> 	3	2	1D
> 	4	2	1D
> 	5	3	2D
> 	6	3	2D
> 	7	4	3D
> 	8	4	3D
> 	9	5	4D
> 	10	5	4D
> 	11	6	5D
> 	12	6	5D
> 	Roll twice (once for each column).

This method results in a 1 in 36 chance of heading off in direction
"1" while giving a 3 in 36 chance for direction "6".  Other directions
have even high likelihoods.  Why is this so?  Are these six directions
in relation to something else other than the hex map for sectors and
subsectors?

IMHO, it would be far simpler to just stick with 1d6 for Direction.  I
do like the bell curve for distance, though, although I could live
with 1d6 for it as well.

James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 05 Sep 97 22:35:51 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: GURPs Traveller

On 09/05/97 at 05:17 PM,  scharlto@ifsna.com said:

>GURPS Traveller Likes and Dislikes

I haven't said anything about the GURPS Traveller announcement yet.  I'm
enthused and delighted.  D&D, GURPS and CT/MT/TNE/T4 are the only systems I
really run games in, other systems I steal ideas from. ;->

So, there's a lot about GURPS I like.  Of course, there are things I don't
like too, but overall Loren and SJG should be able to merge the mechanics
with the background pretty successfully.

>Likes
>-------
>*Copy-Editing
>*Good retail shelf-exposure
>*Steve Jackson Games seems willing to slow down production schedules to
>get the product right
>*Loren is back!

Yes, all that is true.  Now if we can lure the Keith brothers and the
orignal DGP'ers back as well...;->

>Dislikes
>---------
>*GURPS system (actually, more of a utter loathing hatred than a dislike;

Ah, come on! It's not *that* bad. ;-> 

>"Generic" game systems try to please everybody, and in too many cases
>fail, IMHO)

Fair enough, but GURPS *does* work pretty well and with a little creative
tweeking can handle the Traveller feel, just fine. 

>*Steve Jackson Games internal artwork actually makes the TNE artwork look
>good

<Laugh!> That's one of my Likes!  ;-> I'm a minimalist when it comes to art
in game books.  TNE and SJG give *more* than enough artwork for me, and
simple line drawings are just fine.

>*The technology in GURPs Space would be a poor fit to a Traveller universe
>(only a dislike if SJG tries to port that technology to Traveller)

Well, yes, but I don't think that's the plan.  Anyway, if I (and many
others) can port Traveller technology to GURPS for our own games then Loren
& company can certainly do it, too.  

>Concerns
>-------------
>My main concern is the setting.  My Traveller campaign (using TNE rules)
>did not go the Virus route, but I did keep the Rebellion as an important
>background element.  While the loss of the Virus is not too upsetting to
>me, the loss of the grand-scale conflicts and struggles of the Rebellion
>will be a loss.  Yes, the non-Rebellion universe has plenty of
>possibilities to chose from, and I could easily run a campaign there for a
>long time.  HOWEVER, I think that new players are attracted by the ideas
>of conflict and struggle, and the Rebellion offered that in spades.

It seems everybody runs much higher level games than I do.  I've never had
characters that were powerful or influencial enough have any effect on the
Rebellion.  My games deal with free traders, scouts and explorers on and
beyond the frontiers of charted space.  The only game I ever ran where the
Rebellion came up had the PC's being whip-sawed between minor officials of
two factions over who they had to pay inport/export fees to...they ended up
stiffing them both and paying nobody.

>Outcome
>-------------
>I'll likely buy the GURPs Traveller material, if only because Marc and
>Loren are involved in it.  

It's *highly* likely I'll by GURPS Traveller material. ;->

>It is unlikely I will use any of it, but since I've not actually seen
>it yet, I can't say that for a fact.  Most likely I will continue to
>use the TNE rules system and the Rebellion background.

Until we all see it we don't know if we'll like/use any of it. ;->

As for what I'll continue to use...being a heretic, I'll continue to use my
mish-mash of all versions of Traveller, GURPS, FUDGE, Aftermath, and
everything else I've got to conduct campaigns on "The Quental Main." ;->

Eris
AKU GM
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 21:27:07 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: re: Jump in Traveller

>Standing Jump. Standard practice is for ships to do a standing jump 
>(jump with zero velocity)

You might want to note that most whole star systems are moving 
with respect to each other at ~10-300 km/s (plus an average of 
30 km/s for the mainworld's orbital velocities), so if you wnat to
do a "standing jump" you actually accelerate a little to pre-match
velocities with your target system.

>a pulse of energy which is detectable to PRadar.

What's a PRadar? "Passive Radar"? Sort of a contradicition in terms...
Are the sensor rules/types in T4.1 going to be fundamentally
different than T4? I'd be willing to let you include some 
subsection of the Definitive Sensor Rules in T4. I was going to put
in modifiers for detecting ships coming into and out of jump.
(I suppose that leads into the whole question of whether the 
starship rules in T4.1 in general are going to build off all the work
in FFS2...or whether, in another brilliant piece of IG marketing, 
FFS2 is going to be thrown out the window completely.)

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 21:36:18 -0800
From: "Zane H. Healy" <healyzh@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: GURPs Traveller

>GURPS Traveller Likes and Dislikes
>
>Likes
>-------
>*Copy-Editing
>*Good retail shelf-exposure
>*Steve Jackson Games seems willing to slow down production schedules to get
>the product right
>*Loren is back!

Agreed in FULL!

>Dislikes
>---------
>*GURPS system (actually, more of a utter loathing hatred than a dislike;
>"Generic" game systems try to please everybody, and in too many cases fail,
>IMHO)

While I agree to a large extent about Generic Systems, it doesn't always
have to be true.  I've a large selection of the early Hero Games stuff,
Champions is great, but any other setting they put in terms of Champions,
that sucked.  Let's be serious in their version of a Cyberpunk setting the
software for the cyberdecks was simply Champions Superpowers, I think this
was the last product of theirs I bought.

GURPS on the other hand has the Basic Rule book.  You need this to play
GURPS, but it is designed in such a way that the Settings books enhance the
Basic Rules so that the system fits the setting, not the setting fitting
the rules.  A good example of it's capabilities is "GURPS Tekumel" printed
in one of the issues of their Pyramid Magazine.  The "Empire of the Petal
Throne" setting is about the hardest thing around to try to make work
without rules designed specifically for it, GURPS Tekumel works.

>*Steve Jackson Games internal artwork actually makes the TNE artwork look
>good

It also make T4 artwork look good to a large extent.  Artwork does not a
game make, the original Traveller didn't have any.  BUT, it does help to
sell it, and  I've got to admit it makes the books more enjoyable.

>*The technology in GURPs Space would be a poor fit to a Traveller universe
>(only a dislike if SJG tries to port that technology to Traveller)

I don't think this is a problem.  GURPS Space doesn't fit, but as such
supplements as GURPS Lensman have shown a SciFi GURPS setting doesn't have
to use GURPS Space.  There is no reason for them to have Tech that's any
different from Classic Traveller.

			Zane


| Zane H. Healy                    | UNIX Systems Adminstrator |
| healyzh@ix.netcom.com (primary)  | Linux Enthusiast          |
| healyzh@holonet.net (alternate)  | Mac Programmer            |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------+
| For Empire of the Petal Throne and Traveller Role Playing,   |
| and the collecting of Classic Computers with info on them.   |
| see http://www.dragonfire.net/~healyzh/                      |

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 21:45:21 -0700 (PDT)
From: Craig Berry <cberry@cinenet.net>
Subject: Mining, core and ice

> Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 18:54:37 +0200 (MET DST)
> From: Tommy Grav <tommy.grav@astro.uio.no>
> 
> Im developing a world and have a question about mining that I thought I
> should throw out to you.

At Ce Acatl Corporation, we're proud of our mining consultation program,
the key to unlocking the wealth of countless new worlds recently...

Oh, dear me, sorry, that's the marketing spiel.  OK, here's the down and
dirty... :)

> What type of minerals would be feasible to mine on a cold rock planet
> orbiting a M3 main sequence star? Because of the low temperature I
> envision a small community (20,000+) working underground in caves mining
> something, but what? I also need it to be profitable to sent to a TL12 
> heavly populated world two parsec away. Any ideas?

Traveller has always played rather loosely with this, but in my mind only
a very few types of 'raw material', or even primary-processed bulk
material, would pay for the cost of transporting them out of system.  The
sad fact is that, once you're free to go after asteroids, other worlds,
comets, mainworld resources, and so forth in any one system, there's very
little you won't have.  Nature spreads most ores around pretty evenly.

So, for 'nearly-raw material' export, you need something unique to that
system, or nearly so.  Organics are good in this regard (specialty foods
or cloth, for example), but that doesn't apply to your world.  Highly
valuable and relatively uncommon minerals or the elements derived from
them are also believable; lanthanum is the most commonly used example in
Traveller.  Finally, high-quality gemstones might be a truly valuable
export product, if present in high concentrations.  This would also expain
why your mining operation is in caves rather than strip-mining from the
surface; getting intact gemstones is a much more delicate business than
bulk-extracting lanthanum ore.

> Some background perhaps. The system has no gas giants, only one rock
> orbiting about 0.5AU out. The planet has a rotational periode around its
> axis of 300 sederial years at a 5 degrees tilt from the ecliptic plane.
> The planet is over 3000km in radius and with a density of 7864 grams per
> cubic cm. Would this mean that the core would have to be molten or could
> it be solid?

I don't get that rotation figure.  Off the top of my head, such a world's
year would be roughly 200 days long or thereabouts -- certainly between
100 and 300, unless my brain's especially dead tonight.  Read at face
value, your statement above seems to indicate that the world is almost
motionless with respect to the *stars* -- in other words, rotating
"backward" (effectively) with respect to its primary.  This is certainly
possible -- Venus does qualitatively the same thing, though far less
extremely so -- but if you mean something else, please explain what you
were after here.

> Its hydrosphere rating is 0, but with a mean temperature of -217 degrees
> Celcius, no atmosphere, is there a possibility that there are some frozen
> ice of any kind on the surface?

Are you sure that surface temp is right?  0.5 AU from an M3 V, I'd expect
more like -150 C.  Your version is only 56 K!

In any case, I can't imagine a world at either temp not having at least a
moderate coating of ices.

- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
   |   Craig Berry - cberry@cinenet.net
 --*--    Home Page: http://www.cinenet.net/users/cberry/home.html
   |      Member of The HTML Writers Guild: http://www.hwg.org/   
       "Every man and every woman is a star."

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 22:19:51 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Maneuver Time to Jump Point

In mail you write:

> This is the travel time to the safe jump distance from a world (based on
> recent posts). Is it right?

I just spot checked a few entries. I assume that you are using 10 m/s^2
as the value of g? If so, it looks close.

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 21:53:35 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Jump in Traveller

In mail you write:

>         1         170 x speed of light
>         2         340
>         3         500
actually, 510 is closer.

>         4         680
>         5         850
>         6       1000

> TYPES OF JUMP
>        Ships retain their speed and direction when they enter jump
> space and when they emerge from jump.

Speed relative to *what*? 

To maximally comply with known physics, the speed should be relative to
the starting point. And since the destination *is* going to be moving
relative to the starting point, you need to mention that. Somebody
posted something about "average" relative velocities for stars. They
are rather high (100s of km/sec?)

If you have the speed relative to the starting point be the speed
relative to the destination (ie you jump out motionless relative to the
planet you started from, and emerge motionless relative to the planet
you are jumping to), then you have folks pointing out things like the
fact that both planets are orbiting their stars at around 30 km/sec
(and likely in different directions), so why can't they jump
"motionless" with respect to the star.

> `       Standing Jump. Standard practice is for ships to do a
> standing jump (jump with zero velocity); it's safer.

given case 1, then a "standing jump" requires giving the ship the right
speed in the right direction. Which tends to make it "easier" to jump
from certain places relative to the starting planet, thus allowing
pirates to predict where you are likely to jump from. Likewise, it
makes the area you intend to arrive more predictable (you pick starting
and ending points so as to take the most advantage of the relative
velocities of the planets)

In case 2, this doesn't apply, but you do have that question of "zero
velocity with respect to *what*?".

>         Running Jump. A ship could enter jump a high speed (called a
> running jump).  Upon emerging, it need only decelerate as it
> approaches the new world. If poorly calculated, the ship is off
> course and will waste time maneuvering to the world.
>         Consequences. Imagine the risk involved if a ship misexits
> with a high velocity directly toward the small object with no time
> to reach or maneuver, a collision is inevitable.

Unlikely. But also imagine the trouble if you don't have the fuel to
match velocity with the target planet!

> DETECTION
>         Ships entering and leaving jump space can be detected.
>         Entering Jump: A ship entering jump disappears from detector
> screens. There is a pulse of energy which is detectable to PRadar.
>         In Jump: A ship in jump cannot be detected.
>         Leaving Jump. A ship leaving jump emits a pulse of energy
> which is detectable to PRadar.

The ships should also emit a detectable gravity pulse due to their mass
"disappearing" and "appearing". 

>  ASTROGATION
>         The Astrogator's responsibility is to determine a usable
> course and to plot it with the help of the ship's computer. All
> calculation takes place before the jump begins.
>         Commercial Ship Astrogation. The course is plotted for a
> standing jump which will emerge at 100 diameters from the destination
> world.
>         Complex Astrogation. The course is plotted for a running jump
> which will emerge with the ship at full speed aimed at the
> destination world (and the ship then decelerates all the way to the
> destination world).

We also need to know how accurately you can plot the exit position.
That is, how accurately can we pick an exit point.

BTW, you need to point out that if you exit 5 hours late or early, the
planet has *moved* 5 hours worth of orbital motion. For earth, that's
540,000 km!

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 23:35:17 -0800
From: Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca>
Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller

>I would be *very* afraid that this is exactly what will happen with GURPS
>Traveller -- SJG will be *too* successful, and will have their license
>"pulled"
>in order to protect IG's inferior products.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't *Marc* own the Traveller license? It
would have to be Marc to pull the license, and I always got the impression
he was more interested in Traveller being successful and high quality than
in protecting "inferior products".

- --
Richard Hough
rdhough@orca.bc.ca

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 23:42:07 -0800
From: Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca>
Subject: Re: Battle dress turtles

>But you can't win "hearts and minds" from inside a battlepod.  Sure, the
>assult Marines might use them as mini tanks, but I'd wager that the
>majority of TL15 Marines will still being in "old fashioned" BD to take
>advantage of having your arms avalible for work.

I didn't think the goal of an assault force was to win "hearts and minds",
that's for management.

Also, battle pods have retractible manipulative waldos.

- --
Richard Hough
rdhough@orca.bc.ca

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 6 Sep 1997 03:08:37 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Macpherson <john35@wharton.upenn.edu>
Subject: Re: Economics Questions

 
Michael Koehne said:
> Moin John Macpherson, 
> > 	The cost of freight itself should not be the arbitrary 
> > 1000Cr/ton. 
> 
> 	the megacons dictate this price. and any free trader
> 	has trouble competing it.

	I find it _HIGHLY_ unlikely that the megacorps could maintain an 
Imperium-wide collusion on price.  Industries characterized by large 
fixed costs and sticky capacity are the worst possible industries in 
which to try to maintain a cartel.  The incentives to undercut to gain 
volume are just too large.  The problem is made even worse by the very 
long communication times.
	Take a look at the history of the railroad or airline 
industries.  Both of them have been unprofitable and running just above 
cost wherever they are deregulated.

> > In perfectly competitive markets the CF=1.
> 
> 	No the 1kCr/dt is artificial. there is no real trade competition
> 	inside the 3I.

	Why shouldn't there be?
 
> 	This is the "real market" for free traders. In my campain
> 	30% of the passengers are free lance brokers or brokers
> 	of a medium sized company, and they always want :

	Good idea.  But they don't necessarily need a room on the 
ship, just offices at both ends and a partner.  This is how lots of 
trading companies worked historically.
  
> > But a plant at the starport could be run round the clock every day of
> > the week, spreading the cost of the plant out over far more units of fuel.
> 
> 	And how much does a starport cost ?

	For the purposes of the above example, a starport could be a flat 
slab of bedrock.  In other words, pretty darn cheap.  The point is that the 
cost of refined fuel is artificially high in a manner which defies all 
good sense.
 
- -JM

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 06 Sep 1997 03:52:23 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: Re: GrrrrrrrrPS

Semo writes:

>I, for one, sure as hell hope that GURPS Traveller doesn't become the
>"official" Traveller now.  I've never been too fond of GURPS as a system, and
>I'm really not too fond of the prospect of having to buy the GURPS rules and
>then buy the Traveller Sourcebook...

   The *official* word is that GURPS Traveller will be considered
*variant* material.  In the official universe, the Rebellion and
Collapse still happen in 1116 and 1130 respectively.

   That said, if GURPS Traveller becomes very successful, it would only
be logical to expect SJG to want to produce a lot more of it.  Assuming
they do (last I checked, SJG is a for-profit enterprise), there exists
the possibility that they could run IG out of business, ergo become
"canon" by virtue of being "the last man standing".   

>But, then again, I guess it could be worse...
>
>Marc could have licensed out Trav to Palladium :)

   No, no the *real* nightmare scenario would be Wizards of the Coast....  :-0

Regards,

Harold

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1786
***********************************
Traveller-digest    Saturday, September 6 1997    Volume 1997 : Number 1787



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Battle dress turtles  (was RE: Traveller-digest V1997  #1764
Re: Mining, core and ice
GURPS Traveller
Thoughts on roleplaying.
Re: GURPS Trav (T-5?)
The TML Civil War
Re: Task Resolution
Re: Battle dress turtles  (was RE: Traveller-digest V1997  #1764
Re: GrrrrrrrrPS
Re: TNE
CSC Design: The 2010 Chevy Suburban ;-)
Re: GURPS Trav (T-5?)
Re: GrrrrrrrrPS
CSC Design, two versions of a limo
Re: GrrrrrrrrPS
Re: Plague of Duskir etc.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 06 Sep 1997 01:25:52 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Battle dress turtles  (was RE: Traveller-digest V1997  #1764

At 09:15 AM 9/6/97 +0000, you wrote:

>Has anyone thought up a way to home onto gravity disturbances, such 
>as a CG/anti-grav (or whatever) unit? It just occured to me looking 
>at this, because if you can then grav units will become special 
>purpose only, with tracks for all the normal work.

Beyond that, just home in on the IR signatures from the power plant.  All
of these fusion+ powered grav vehicles will be postively glowing with waste
heat, and I can't see battle pods being any different.

Using batteries will aleviate the problem somewhat, but you'll still need
to take measures to disguise the IR signature.

>Continuing on this vein any from of grav sensor (denitometers maybe?) 
>would be able to pick up a formation of grav vehicles once they 
>started thier CG's up, so tracked units might have an advantage 
>there.

Normal sensors will be able to pick up grav vehicles that venture into open
sky, forcing them to hug dirt.  This keeps ground combat "grounded", and
really (IMHO) cuts back on the effectiveness of grav tanks when you figure
in the cost and weight.

- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 06 Sep 1997 01:46:32 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Mining, core and ice

At 06:54 PM 9/5/97 +0200, you wrote:
>
>Im developing a world and have a question about mining that I thought I
>should throw out to you.
>
>What type of minerals would be feasible to mine on a cold rock planet
>orbiting a M3 main sequence star? Because of the low temperature I
>envision a small community (20,000+) working underground in caves mining
>something, but what? I also need it to be profitable to sent to a TL12 
>heavly populated world two parsec away. Any ideas?
>
>Some background perhaps. The system has no gas giants, only one rock
>orbiting about 0.5AU out. The planet has a rotational periode around its
>axis of 300 sederial years at a 5 degrees tilt from the ecliptic plane.
>The planet is over 3000km in radius and with a density of 7864 grams per
>cubic cm. Would this mean that the core would have to be molten or could
>it be solid?

I hope you meant 7.864g/cm..  This is very dense, so you'd probably find a
great deal of heavy metals, radioactives, and rare earths (lanthanum strike!)

The core might be molten, dependeding upon the age of the world.  If it's
much older than about 3-4 billion years, the core has probably cooled.  An
interesting anomoly would be an older world with a high percentage of
radioactives and a still molten core.

>Its hydrosphere rating is 0, but with a mean temperature of -217 degrees
>Celcius, no atmosphere, is there a possibility that there are some frozen
>ice of any kind on the surface?

The planet will probably be crusted with odd exotic ices.  not enough to
really make a difference, but a passable source of chemicals if needed.

- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 06 Sep 1997 11:44:44 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: GURPS Traveller

On Sat, 6 Sep 1997 04:12:45 -0400, you wrote:

>Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 23:35:17 -0800
>From: Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca>
>Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller
>
>>I would be *very* afraid that this is exactly what will happen with GURPS
>>Traveller -- SJG will be *too* successful, and will have their license
>>"pulled"
>>in order to protect IG's inferior products.
>
>Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't *Marc* own the Traveller license? It
>would have to be Marc to pull the license, and I always got the impression
>he was more interested in Traveller being successful and high quality than
>in protecting "inferior products".

True. But what are the terms of the agreement with Sweetpea? I would have
thought that they would have wanted some degree of protection from just this
possibility when they put the money up to create their subsidiary (IG) and do
T4. After all, we're talking an entertainment company here -- and they have a
pretty ferocious rep for contracts!

I hope that GURPS Traveller does one of two things --

a) Completely replaces the inferior IG product (flame retardant underwear *on*) 

OR

b) Gives IG such a swift kick in the backside that they finally fire who has to
be fired, hire who needs to be hired, and start producing product that is of at
least the same playtest, proofreading, and graphic layout quality of GURPS
proudcts.

Personally I think there is a snowball's chance in In Nomine of (b) happening,
so I'd vote for (a) ... and will. As I said, I will no longer buy IG products as
a rule, but I will buy everything that SJG puts out. And I had such high hopes
(as did we all) of IG and T4. Pity the people involved with it didn't have a
clue.
- ---------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU)
Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)
Designer, Standard Role Playing (PGD)

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 6 Sep 1997 07:47:32 -0500
From: David Reed <david@techrefuge.com>
Subject: Thoughts on roleplaying.

These came out of a discussion (no, really, there's actually traffic now) 
on the Twilight: 2000 list.  I wanted some Traveller opinions on it as 
well.

I wrote:
> I'm also not sure how long the hobby will last in the face of rapidly
> expanding and increasing in complexity multiplayer online games.
> Sometimes, when my players really start getting annoying, I'm tempted
> to either go to PBeM or give up and play Diablo instead.  ;-(  Less
> overhead, until we get campaign/adventure creators for online, real
> time roleplaying.  It's coming...  If only I can determine a feasible
> economic model for it, and pitch it to investors.

Questions?  Comments?
______________________________________________________________________

David Reed           | All wickedness is weakness: that plea therefore
                     | With God or Man will gain thee no remission.
david@techrefuge.com |                -John Milton, "Samson Agonistes"
______________________________________________________________________

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 06 Sep 1997 04:53:12 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Re: GURPS Trav (T-5?)

Craig Berry wrote

> > From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
> > 
> > >Finaly we learn the Grandfather is small potatoes, compared to the might of 
> > >Old Cthuluhu!  Muhahahahahaaaa!
> > 
> > Grandfather *is* Old Cthuluhu.  Templar Secret #3374576.
> 
> No, no, no.  Grandfather is *new* Cthulhu.  However, when he was
> introduced, public reaction was very unfavorable, so the original was
> returned to the market as Cthulhu Classic.  Don't even ask about the dark
> inner mysteries of Diet Cthulhu, and (*shudder*) the legendary Cthulhu
> Free...

You got Cthulhu for free ?  I had to pay about $28 for my Cthulhu plush
when I ordered him from Pagan publishing but he was well worth it.  If
anyone tells you that you are too old for stuffed animals they don't
know about the great Great Cthulhu plush.  (I will admit that I am
somewhat frustrated by the inability of the plush to cause SAN loses).

- -- 
pnewman@alaska.net	Peter Newman 
- --------------------------------------------------------
"I have been nothing but compassionate and understanding. I mean, all
you had to do was to admit you were wrong and I was right and everything
would've been fine." -- Ivanova to Winters in Babylon5: "Divided
Loyalties"

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 06 Sep 1997 07:14:20 PDT
From: "Charles Li" <chaslimd@hotmail.com>
Subject: The TML Civil War

Well, it would appear that GURPS Traveller will just be another divisive 
issue, as Harold pointed put earlier, on the TML.
     It is unfortunate, as this development, when viewed impartially, is 
good for the future of the Traveller (i.e. as long as anyone prints 
anything about it, it lives).  Unfortunately, some hard-core Traveller 
fans will not accept or use the GURPS version, and that's OK.  
    I am a longtime player, since 1979, and consider myself as devoted 
to the spirit of the game as anyone on this list.  However, I will use 
the GURPS Traveller rules when it becomes available, and adapt it to all 
my official campaigns.  I'll still buy IG products because of their 
canonical nature as well as their tie-ins to the past history that can 
enhance play.
    Everyone will make their own choices to their own tastes.  Time to 
stop whining and move T4.1 onwards.

Charles

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 6 Sep 1997 14:49:26 +0000
From: Garry Ward <Garry.E.Ward@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Task Resolution

At 09:17 AM 9/5/97 +0000, Marc wrote:
>In a message dated 97-09-04 13:59:17 EDT, you write:
>
><snip>
>
>I mistakenly posted the Task Chapter to the whole list instead of to the
>address who requested it.
>
>Sorry.
>
>Marc
>
>

Not necessarily sorry; I was debating asking for the info; you simple
resolved the question for me.

Eventually I wil find the time to look at it.

Garry

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 06 Sep 1997 14:52:57 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: Battle dress turtles  (was RE: Traveller-digest V1997  #1764

On Sat, 06 Sep 1997 01:25:52 -0700, Douglas E. Berry wrote:

> At 09:15 AM 9/6/97 +0000, you wrote:
> 
> >Has anyone thought up a way to home onto gravity disturbances, such 
> >as a CG/anti-grav (or whatever) unit? It just occured to me looking 
> >at this, because if you can then grav units will become special 
> >purpose only, with tracks for all the normal work.
> 
> Beyond that, just home in on the IR signatures from the power plant.  All
> of these fusion+ powered grav vehicles will be postively glowing with waste
> heat, and I can't see battle pods being any different.

Question:  *must* fusion power plants operate at *full* power all the
time or can they be run at just the right setting to provide the
amount of power required (thereby reducing it's heat signature)?  Or
does the simple fact that we are dealing with superheated plasma make
this a moot point? :)

James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 6 Sep 1997 11:52:31 -0400 (EDT)
From: SemoFetus@aol.com
Subject: Re: GrrrrrrrrPS

Harold said:
>   The *official* word is that GURPS Traveller will be considered
>*variant* material.  In the official universe, the Rebellion and
>Collapse still happen in 1116 and 1130 respectively.

Well, that's somewhat heartening.  Although I'm not as worried about canon as
I am about the system taking over.

Harold said some more:
>   That said, if GURPS Traveller becomes very successful, it would only
>be logical to expect SJG to want to produce a lot more of it.  Assuming
>they do (last I checked, SJG is a for-profit enterprise), there exists
>the possibility that they could run IG out of business, ergo become
>"canon" by virtue of being "the last man standing".   

That's the problem right there.  However, how popular is GURPS stuff?  I see
the books in all the stores, I know people who have books for it...  But,
nobody I know has ever _played_ it.  (GURPS aficionados, please do not take
insult, this isn't meant as an attack.  Actually, even some of the GURPS fans
on the various lists have said that they don't play they just have the books)

At last, Harold said:
>   No, no the *real* nightmare scenario would be Wizards of the Coast....  :-0

Yeah, they'd fire all of the designers right before Christmas.

Semo

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 6 Sep 1997 09:43:39 -0800
From: "Zane H. Healy" <healyzh@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: TNE

>>"Zane H. Healy" <healyzh@ix.netcom.com> said:
>>> I don't know about throwing out the stuff in MegaTraveller, but I'm all for
>>> throwing TNE in the bin where it belongs
>>  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>	And people wonder why us TNE folks feel the need to have our own
>>mailing list.
>
>Zane,
>
>Have you ever even played TNE? From your statement, I'm led to believe you
>haven't.
>
>Best,
>
>Chris Griffen

No, I've not played it, but I have GM'd it.  Overall it was an excellent
product, however the basic underlying concept of the Virus I just couldn't
stomach.  Despite the fact that I can't stomach the main setting, I do own
all the TNE books.  The two "Domain of Deneb" books really got my intrest
up, but then TNE died.  While I'd like to see the TNE setting finished out,
I still can't stand it.

TNE is the version of Traveller that introduced me to Traveller, but I
prefer the Classic setting.  As for Mega, I've never been able to decide if
I like it or not.


			Zane


| Zane H. Healy                    | UNIX Systems Adminstrator |
| healyzh@ix.netcom.com (primary)  | Linux Enthusiast          |
| healyzh@holonet.net (alternate)  | Mac Programmer            |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------+
| For Empire of the Petal Throne and Traveller Role Playing,   |
| and the collecting of Classic Computers with info on them.   |
| see http://www.dragonfire.net/~healyzh/                      |

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 6 Sep 1997 11:01:59 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: CSC Design: The 2010 Chevy Suburban ;-)

Still big and hulking and still gets lousy gas mileage ;-)
Plus it's even more expensive !

Chevy Suburban 2010's (TL10)
Designed by Bruce Johnson

Summary:
     1.00 displacement ton box streamlined;  2.59 tonnes;  kCr 52.0
Chassis:
     14.0 kL box streamlined (3.7 m long x 1.9 m wide x 1.9 m high);
Structure: 168 kg of fiber laminate, rated for 1.0Gs, body 0.15 cm thick,
1 armour rating
     
Performance:
     350 kW TL8 Turbine, MHD power plant;  Fuel: 210 L of high-grade hcarb
(210 kg), 6 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 350 kW wheels;  Maximum Speed: 170 km/h;  Range:
1021 km;  Agility: +3DM
Crew & Passengers:
     Crew roster: driver;  1 crew station;  5 roomy passenger seats
Communications:
     Regional Radio (10 W, TL10, SmVcl)
Sensors:
     No sensors installed.
Other:
     Options: sunroof, entertainment centre
     Safety Features: anti-theft system, Roadgrid, fire suppression system
     trailer hitch for 10.0 tonnes; 1.61 kL of cargo space


Designed with CSC (software (c) Robert Prior, 1997)


Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 06 Sep 1997 10:54:51 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: GURPS Trav (T-5?)

At 04:53 AM 9/6/97 -0800, you wrote:
>Craig Berry wrote

>> No, no, no.  Grandfather is *new* Cthulhu.  However, when he was
>> introduced, public reaction was very unfavorable, so the original was
>> returned to the market as Cthulhu Classic.  Don't even ask about the dark
>> inner mysteries of Diet Cthulhu, and (*shudder*) the legendary Cthulhu
>> Free...
>
>You got Cthulhu for free ?  I had to pay about $28 for my Cthulhu plush
>when I ordered him from Pagan publishing but he was well worth it.  If
>anyone tells you that you are too old for stuffed animals they don't
>know about the great Great Cthulhu plush.  (I will admit that I am
>somewhat frustrated by the inability of the plush to cause SAN loses).

I got a hold of some of the plush Cthuthlu babies at PacificCon a few years
back.. being in Chaosium's home area has it's advantages at times..

As for stuffed animals, Kirsten and I own at least 3 dozen teddy bears,
most of whom live in the bed.  You are never to old to have a happy childhood.

Yes, the plush Cthulthu doesn't cause SAN loss, but you can whack people
while they're going "awww..... how CUTE!" *WHACK!*  *thud*
- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 06 Sep 1997 10:50:36 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: GrrrrrrrrPS

At 11:52 AM 9/6/97 -0400, you wrote:

>Harold said some more:
>>   That said, if GURPS Traveller becomes very successful, it would only
>>be logical to expect SJG to want to produce a lot more of it.  Assuming
>>they do (last I checked, SJG is a for-profit enterprise), there exists
>>the possibility that they could run IG out of business, ergo become
>>"canon" by virtue of being "the last man standing".   
>
>That's the problem right there.  However, how popular is GURPS stuff?  I see
>the books in all the stores, I know people who have books for it...  But,
>nobody I know has ever _played_ it.  (GURPS aficionados, please do not take
>insult, this isn't meant as an attack.  Actually, even some of the GURPS fans
>on the various lists have said that they don't play they just have the books)

I use GURPS for certain genres.. it's my high fantasy system of choice.  I
have more than enough of the SF books to make adapting Traveller to GURPS
simple.

A good number of the books (Aztecs, Illuminati, and IOU come to mind) I
have just for the reference value.

>At last, Harold said:
>>   No, no the *real* nightmare scenario would be Wizards of the
>>Coast....  :-0
>
>Yeah, they'd fire all of the designers right before Christmas.

No, the real Nightmare would be if White Wolf got a hold of Traveller..

"I'm Clan Merchant, and I'm having angst over my loss of cargo..."
- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 6 Sep 1997 11:10:04 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: CSC Design, two versions of a limo

First, the standard one:
Limousine (TL8)
Designed by Bruce Johnson

Summary:
     1.20 displacement ton cylinder streamlined;  3.93 tonnes;  kCr 31.8
Chassis:
     16.8 kL cylinder streamlined (6.4 m long x 1.8 m wide x 1.8 m high);
Structure: 348 kg of light alloy, rated for 1.0Gs, body 0.05 cm thick, 1
armour rating
     
Performance:
     500 kW TL5 Imp. Internal Combustion power plant;  Fuel: 437 L of
high-grade hcarb (437 kg), 7 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 500 kW wheels;  Maximum Speed: 160 km/h;  Range:
1121 km;  Agility: +3DM
Crew & Passengers:
     Crew roster: driver;  1 crew station;  6 roomy passenger seats
Communications:
     No communicators installed.
Sensors:
     No sensors installed.
Other:
     Options: automatic sunroof, entertainment centre, wet bar
     Safety Features: anti-hijack system, anti-theft system, Roadgrid,
fire suppression system
     1.24 kL of cargo space


Designed with CSC (software (c) Robert Prior, 1997)

And now the upgraded higher security version, armored, with an upgraded
power plant and propulsion.

Armored Limo (TL8)
Designed by Bruce Johnson

Summary:
     1.20 displacement ton cylinder streamlined;  4.16 tonnes;  kCr 128
Chassis:
     16.8 kL cylinder streamlined (6.4 m long x 1.8 m wide x 1.8 m high);
Structure: 348 kg of light alloy, rated for 1.0Gs, body 0.05 cm thick
     Armour: 4 front (0.20 cm), 4 sides (0.30 cm), 4 rear (0.20 cm), 4 top
(0.20 cm), 5 bottom (0.50 cm)
Performance:
     900 kW TL8 Turbine, MHD power plant;  Fuel: 630 L of high-grade hcarb
(630 kg), 7 hours supply
     Propulsion System: 900 kW wheels;  Maximum Speed: 273 km/h;  Range:
1908 km;  Agility: +3DM
Crew & Passengers:
     Crew roster: driver, bodyguard;  1 crew station;  6 roomy passenger
seats
Communications:
     Regional Radio (10 W, TL8, SmVcl)
Sensors:
     No sensors installed.
Other:
     Options: automatic sunroof, entertainment centre, wet bar
     Safety Features: anti-hijack system, anti-theft system, Roadgrid,
fire suppression system
     307 L of cargo space


Designed with CSC (software (c) Robert Prior, 1997)


Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 06 Sep 1997 12:08:47 PDT
From: "Charles Li" <chaslimd@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: GrrrrrrrrPS

>Harold said:
>>   The *official* word is that GURPS Traveller will be considered
>>*variant* material.  In the official universe, the Rebellion and
>>Collapse still happen in 1116 and 1130 respectively.
>
>Well, that's somewhat heartening.  Although I'm not as worried about canon as
>I am about the system taking over.
>
>Harold said some more:
>>   That said, if GURPS Traveller becomes very successful, it would only
>>be logical to expect SJG to want to produce a lot more of it.  Assuming
>>they do (last I checked, SJG is a for-profit enterprise), there exists
>>the possibility that they could run IG out of business, ergo become
>>"canon" by virtue of being "the last man standing".   
>
>That's the problem right there.  However, how popular is GURPS stuff?  I see
>the books in all the stores, I know people who have books for it...  But,
>nobody I know has ever _played_ it.  (GURPS aficionados, please do not take
>insult, this isn't meant as an attack.  Actually, even some of the GURPS fans
>on the various lists have said that they don't play they just have the 
books)
>
>At last, Harold said:
>>   No, no the *real* nightmare scenario would be Wizards of the
>>Coast....  :-0
>
>Yeah, they'd fire all of the designers right before Christmas.
>
>Semo

Actually, I know more people who play GURPS than all the Traveller 
versions comibined, but I know a lot more people who dabble with the 
Traveller system and gadget/ship design.
    People should be happy if the situation ever occured in which IG and 
SJ products would be in such high demand to compete for shelf space with 
each other.
   Here is a reminder to the population at large to relax and play with 
the system they are comfortable with (and avoid them canon fights).

Charles

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 6 Sep 1997 21:58:03 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Plague of Duskir etc.

Phillip McGregor writes:
>>They would know how to guard against its spread (always assuming, of
>>course, that the incubation period didn't run into years). Not much 
>>help when dealing with a massive number of carriers.
> 
>I can't think of too many really majorly lethal diseases that have incubation
>times in years -- 

I think maybe that's one way I have another attitude to canon than you do.
You seem to insist that if a theory is more plausible than canon, then it
is to be preferred to canon. There I disagree with you. IMO, once something
is established as a fact, a sort of reverse burden of proof applies. In
order to reject a canonical fact it must be completely implausible, not just
more implausible than some other possibility. After all, historically, some 
pretty long shots have come off once in a while.

I'll expand on this theme a bit further down. Meanwhile, the fact that we
don't know of any disease that behaves just the way that is needed to
explain some odd canonical fact is no proof that such a disease couldn't
exist. 

>The only way that I can see your "solution" being an actual solution is
>if you are prepared to ditch the idea of the vulnerability of the Vilani 
>immune system (which I realise isn't yours, but you *have* supported it) 
>as it would  seem to contradict it -- to me, at least.

I don't follow your logic here (But I'll be happy to ditch that theory if
a better one comes along).

>>There's another possibility. That either the Terran state-of-the-art
>>medical knowledge was not capable of dealing with these problems (which
>>would indicate that the theory of one particular, hitherto unknown,
>>problem present in Vilani and not in Terrans were responsible) or the
>>really state-of-the-art technology was not available. Perhaps TL 13
>>medical technology requires Really Big Machines. Machinery that just
>>wasn't available at first on even TL 11 planets.
> 
>This seems to be drawing a *very* long bow -- I mean, how different *are* 
>the Vilani? Are they a different species? This is not the case as we know 
>that they were capable of interbreeding with other minor human races and 
>with Terrans.

No, but so what? The Amerindians weren't nearly as different from the 
Europeans as we know the Vilani are from Terrans.

>We can deal with diseases in Terran organisms here and now even if they 
>aren't human ... that's what Veterinarians do all the time. Yet here you 
>are suggesting that Vilani have some unique difference that makes them 
>not only susceptible to Terran diseases *but* also makes them somehow 
>able to transform the diseases into a form that cannot be treated with 
>standard treatments (antibiotics and ativirals) ... after all, the 
>bacteria and viruses are the problem, and *they* haven't changed. 

How can you say that? 50 years ago penicillin was a wonder drug that cured
most any infection. Nowadays more and more penicillin-resistent strains of
bacteria appear. Any bug that survives living with humans while they
evolve TL 13 medical drugs will have a chance of adapting to those drugs.
Some won't make it, of course. But some will, and those that has the best
chance of surviving are those that don't harm their host and thereby avoid
getting targeted. And those are particularily the ones that would attack
the Vilani: the bugs that the Terrans carried around without being bothered
by them.

>>You're postulating that the ability to recognize a problem gives the
>>ability to solve it in short order. There's plenty of AIDS and cancer
>>researchers that won't agree with you.
> 
>Well, the Vilani *do* have computers. And they *have* had them for a *very* 
>long time. And if people start dying we can reasonahly assume that basic 
>folk knowledge of such unusual (but not rare) medical problems will be 
>enough to trigger database searches.

Yes, we can assume that the Vilani would be able to recognize a disease for
what it is rather than an evil spell. That dosen't mean they will be able
to develop a cure in time to do any good.

>>OK, that makes sense. Let's assume that the Vilani did have an immune system 
>>equivalent to heir minor human subjects. That leaves several possibilities:
>>
>>The other minor races that the Terrans encountered had similar problems. It
>>just wasn't mentioned specifically, since the Vilani constituted by far the
>>most of the victims. Or, the Vilani was suceptible to something carried by
>>the Terrans and the rest wasn't. Pure chance, nothing else.
> 
>Which still doesn't explain how Terran treatments don't work -- 

It works this way: You invent an antibiotic. You use it. Eventually some bugs
comes along that has developed an immunity to said drug. You then invent a 
better one and the cycle continues. In the meantime all Terrans carry around 
something we'll call Bug A. Bug A is a harmless little critter that gives
you a mild fever when you first contract it whereafter you become immune to
it and carries it around with no ill effect to show for it. One day you get
infected by Bug B, a nasty little critter that causes swollen joints and
sore throat. You dose it with Wonder Drug and keep on dosing until you've
killed off all of Bug B. You know that you've gotten rid of all of Bug B,
because that's what you're fighting, and you don't want Bug B to become
resistant to Wonder Drug. But you don't care one whit for Bug A, so you
discontinue the treatment when only 95% of Bug A has been killed. The hardy
survivors brred back up to the point where your own body keeps it in check
with no ill effect. Later you get infected with Bug C, another nasty little
customer and you get another dose of Wonder Drug. But this time, since they
are all descended from the hardiest 5%, 50% survives. Pretty soon Bug A is
immune to Wonder Drug. Eventually, though it takes longer, some resistant 
Bug Bs and Bug Cs comes along too and you switch to Super Wonder Drug and 
the process continues.

Then one day you go along to Dingir, breathe on a Vilani, and give him Bug A,
which has a much nastier effect on him. And when you try to treat him with
Wonder Drug and Super Wonder Drug and Super Collossal Wonder Drug, you find
that Bug A is immune to everything you can throw at it.

>>I still question your basic assumption that the Terran TL 13 medical
>>knowledge was a magic wand that could cure everything. Propably they
>>could deal with most of the problems. But it only takes one areosol-
>>transmitted fatal disease with an incubation period of a few weeks per
>>planet. The Terrans must have been carrying hundreds or thousands of
> 
>These antibiotics and antivirals are hardly difficult to produce -- and 
>local tech could easily be converted. 

If the Vilani medical technology lags behind their general TL 11 by one or
two and the bugs have adapted to TL 13 remedies, then it is quite possible
that you couldn't adapt the Vilani technology.

>And are you arguing that the Terrans had no idea of the problem or its 
>magnitude -- we *are* talking a military coup based government, and the 
>military are notorious for having contingency plans for *everything*. 
>And they had fought the Vilani and occupied their worlds for over a 
>century -- so the problem would not have been new or unknown. 

I checked the sources last night, and according to TD#20 the first
infections came from Terran POWs.

>Occam's razor means that either the Terrans deliberately spread the 
>disease(s) (and, as I explained above, this doesn't make economic sense) 
>or that they were so vastly incompetent that they could not possibly have 
>beaten the Vilani (or anybody else) -- or, more likely, that there never 
>was any Plague of Duskir, and that it was really a Vilani "stab in the 
>back" excuse.

That explanation isn't very good when you consider that the story comes
from Solomani sources (_Rats&Cats_) and isn't mentioned at all in _Cogs&
Dogs_. If there are any mythmaking involved then the plagues really was
deliberately introduced and the _Solomani_ are trying to cover it up ;-).
 
>>>The reason we are given for the Estigaribbia coup is that he and
>>>the Terran Navy were concerned with the poor attitude (alleged) of
>>>the Terran government towards the Vilani. Why do this if you want 
>>>to kill off massive numbers anyway?
>>
>>Aside from the point that what Estigaribba _said_ he wanted may not be
>>what he wanted, I agree that if the Terrans could have stopped these
>>epidemics, then they _propably_ would. Presumably they did stop a lot
>>of them. How could we tell? The ones they couldn't tell would obviously
>>get all the attention. You don't see many front page stories about the
>>absence of polio in Denmark today.
> 
>Then you agree that the problem is (or has probably been) blown out of all
>proportion by Vilani apologists -- in their variation of the "stab in the 
>back" theory. "We would have beaten the dastardly Terrans except that they 
>didn't play fair, and used diseases to deliberately destroy our society." ???

No, I don't. What we have here is a canonical fact (lots of Vilani died) and
a canonical explanation. You claim that it couldn't have happened that way.
Maybe you're right. If so, we have a fact and an explanation that dosen't
make sense. Now, some people, and I suspect that it is the kind you think
of as 'canon-heads', would say "I don't care if it is impossible, canon says
it happened, so it happened". I share your disdain for that attitude. If
something dosen't make sense, then it should be changed to something that
does. But you want to "explain" it by, essentially, saying: "It didn't 
happen at all". I hope you won't take offense, but I have only a little 
more respect for that attitude. My inclination is to say: "It happened, but 
perhaps not in quite that way and not for quite those reasons". In other 
words, to change as little as possible of the previously published facts.

Now, maybe I'm doing you an injustice. Goodness knows that there are facts
that I can't explain in any way (How the Aslan _ihatei_ managed to conquer
Tobia and why Norris allowed the Vargr to encroach on the Domain of Deneb,
for two examples), and in both cases I'm willing to argue that "It didn't
happen at all". If that is the way things are for you here  --  that you
would prefer to find a plausible explanation, but haven't been able to --
then I think it could be worthwhile to continue the discussion. But if you 
actually prefer "It didn't happen at all" to "It happened, but not quite
that way", then I think we should just agree to disagree.

>>>>But what if vaccination proves not to work on the Vilani? Remember,
>>>>Andrew is postulating an impaired Vilani immume system.
>>> 
>>>And is there any evidence for this? 
>>
>>Not unless you count the massive die-offs in the Plague of Duskir ;-)
>>This is a theory proposed to explain why the Vilani medical technology
>>was so poor.
> 
>But we have no "evidence" of massive die offs, and a lot of circumstantial
>evidence to show why it would be unlikely to have occurred at all.

Yes we have. _S&A_ may have been viewpoint writing (and you'll still have
to come up with an explanation why a Solomani is spouting Vilani claptrap),
but the article in TD#20 is pure authorial voice. According to that the
plagues killed over a billion people on several thousand worlds.

(As an aside, this works out at an average of 500,000+ people per planet.
Undoubtedly there were planets with a lot more than the average number of
deaths, but if the plagues really did leave Solomani immigrants as the
majority on some planets, then many Vilani planets must have had
populations down in the 10s of millions; something I've argued for before.)
 
>>That one is no problem. I think "Rats&Cats" even give the explanation. The
>>Vilani that are alive in 1100 are descended from those Vilani whose
>>immume systems were a bit stronger than those of those who died.
> 
>But even then they should be much more vulnerable to Terran diseases than any
>Terran given the arguments you are supporting re their weakened immune system.

That's just not true. If the present day Vilani are descended from the part
of their predecessors that were stronger than the norm, then it is perfectly
plausible that they are stronger too. And, of course, there has been
considerable contact with Terrans _since_ the Plague.

>>No, they will handle those bacteria that have not adapted to the anti-
>>biotica. Diseases adapt too. That is something you seem to forget.
> 
>This seems obtuse -- the Terrans in the game and the medical science that 
>is given does not have any problem handling diseases. 

I think that in the heat of the discussion you've forgotten that exotic 
diseases is a stable of Science Fiction and has been the basis of quite a
few Amber Zones. Not only is there plenty of evidence that Milieu 1100 
medical knowledge and technology is not perfect, but the loss of plot
potential if medicine _was_ perfect is such that if the rules said it
was perfect, I would argue to change that, and canon be damned ;-) 

>We know that there is ongoing research into antibiotics and antivirals 
>for the very reasons that you suggest -- and that a variant of the disease 
>that was (a) lethal enough to be rendered immune to antibiotics ... i.e. 
>it had to be treated with antibiotics will (b) be lethal to Terrans also, 
>perhaps not *as* lethal, but lethal nonetheless (otherwise they would not 
>have used antibiotics against it in the first place).

As I argued above, a bug can be exposed to antibiotics without being the
target (And, in fact, is much more likely to develop immunity if it isn't).
Socondly, I don't think anyone are making any serious effort to stamp out
measels, yet measels were lethal to the Amerindians (Or am I thinking
about some other childhood disease?).

>Ergo, if the Plague of Duskir really existed, it would have caused massive,
>though lesser, deaths amongst Terrans as well. 

Not necessarily.

>And there is no evidence of this -- and Terran loyalists would have 
>indicated this if it was so as a counter to the Vilani "stab in the 
>back" claims.

Since the Vilani isn't pushing any "stab in the back" claims (that's just
your theory, remember? You can't use a theory to prove itself) the Solomani
dosen't have to defend themselves. And, as I said, a disease can be lethal
to one group of people and utterly innocuous to another group. 

>>But, again, we know that even the TL 15 remedies of the 3rd Imperium are
>>not 100% effective. Why would you assume that TL 13 remedies would be?
> 
>How do we know? Well, by the absence of special rules that indicate that 
>any character is vulnerable to a disease based on some sort of racial
>susceptibility. 

But the immunities of people's great-times-sixty-grandchildren cannot
possibly have any bearing on their own immunities. Be reasonable.

>The absence of any rules or data that indicate that the Sylean Confed ever 
>suffered from huge debilitatingly lethal plagues. Seems pretty conclusive 
>to me.

The Sylean Comfederation is forty or more generations removed from the
problem. Proves absolutely damn-all to me.
 
>>>Yep, but assuming that it's all part of a Vilani "nationalist" version of
>>>the "stab in the back" of Hitler and the Nazis is equally valid.
>>
>>It is certainly valid, but is it necessary? If both views are valid, then
>>why not use the one that is closest to PPM?
> 
>But I would argue that the version I suggest does not contradict the PPM 
>either, and is more reasonable and believable to boot. I guess we'll just 
>have to agree to disagree on that one!

"It didn't happen at all." Do you seriously prefer that as a solution?
Somehow I doubt it.


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1787
***********************************
Traveller-digest    Saturday, September 6 1997    Volume 1997 : Number 1788



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Sea Bears
Cthulhu plush!?
Re: Thoughts on roleplaying.
Re: GrrrrrrrrPS
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1784
Traveller: The Technogeeking
Re: CT, Mega, TNE, T4, and then GURPS
Margaret and slavery???
What's New? (Was: Cartoon Nostalgia)
Re: GURPS Traveller announced....
Re: Tech Levels
Re: Re:Plague of Duskir etc.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 6 Sep 1997 22:10:10 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Sea Bears

GypsyComet@aol.com writes:
>
>They could also be early Imperial for most of the same reasons. One amusing
>thought is that they were all imported by ONE Ziru Sirka project. 

I've decided that the Ziru Sirka didn't reach Chronor Subsector. In my
universe they didn't get farther than the trailing half of the Spinward
Marches. I belive that is reasonable. We know that they reached Regina
Subsector and there is no mention anywhere that they ever reached Darrian.


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 6 Sep 1997 14:05:38 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Cthulhu plush!?

In mail you write:

> You got Cthulhu for free ?  I had to pay about $28 for my Cthulhu plush
> when I ordered him from Pagan publishing but he was well worth it.  If
> anyone tells you that you are too old for stuffed animals they don't
> know about the great Great Cthulhu plush.  (I will admit that I am
> somewhat frustrated by the inability of the plush to cause SAN loses).

Somebody gave me a URL to order one of those a while back, but I
couldn't find any ordering info on the page.

ps. Have you read any of the "H.P. Lushcraft" stories? :-)

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 6 Sep 1997 14:08:50 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Thoughts on roleplaying.

In mail you write:

> These came out of a discussion (no, really, there's actually traffic now) 
> on the Twilight: 2000 list.  I wanted some Traveller opinions on it as 
> well.
>
> I wrote:
>> I'm also not sure how long the hobby will last in the face of rapidly
>> expanding and increasing in complexity multiplayer online games.
>> Sometimes, when my players really start getting annoying, I'm tempted
>> to either go to PBeM or give up and play Diablo instead.  ;-(  Less
>> overhead, until we get campaign/adventure creators for online, real
>> time roleplaying.  It's coming...  If only I can determine a feasible
>> economic model for it, and pitch it to investors.

Don't ask me about the *economics*, but I've often thought that given
the right software, you could have players running around an online
Imperium, with GMs running the various star systems. 

The players make a jump, the software figures out where they will come
out, and emails the GM for that area. He then has the week to get ready
for the players, and they could use something like IRC (or even
"dedicated" software) to get together with him at the appointed time
and day. Then they play things out online until the next jump.

The network software would have to keep track of players and GMs, the
player software needs to be able to display star maps, system maps,
planetary maps, and "local" maps, as well as things like starship
plans. It'd also have to double as a sensor display and control panel
for space combat.

The GM software has to keep track of his maps, including things like
planetary positions, planetary details, etc. And it too has to function
as a battle display.

If the software was good enough, you could keep play to something
resembling realtime, by adjusting the realtime length of jumps to allow
for mutually acceptable times for the GM and players to "meet". 

And just think of the fun if more than one group of players jumps into
the same system... :-)

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 06 Sep 1997 12:58:53 -0700
From: Evyn MacDude <wmacdude@Concentric.net>
Subject: Re: GrrrrrrrrPS

Douglas E. Berry wrote:

> No, the real Nightmare would be if White Wolf got a hold of Traveller..
> 
> "I'm Clan Merchant, and I'm having angst over my loss of cargo..."

ROFLMAO
- -- 
Evyn,
Warleader of the Clan MacDude
Yuppie Hunter of the Forgotten Surf
	Fortalice Desertum
	AD. 1997

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 6 Sep 1997 17:30:08 -0500 (CDT)
From: Joseph "Chepe" Lockett <jlockett@io.com>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1784

Quoth Phillip McGregor:
> But remember, SJG had a White Wolf license -- until White Wolf pulled it for
> no better reason than the SJG products were superior (better proofreading,
> graphics, playtesting etc.) and they were evidently worried (perhaps with
> no real reason -- I don't have any figures, obviously!) that there were
> (or would soon be) losing sales *themselves* as people bought the superior
> SJG products.

Actually, it was because Steve Wieck (WWGS president) and Steve Jackson
had a major personality conflict, causing a private tiff that escalated
into its own UseNet flame war....  Anybody remember the "battle of the two
Steves" on rec.games.frp.misc?

- ----------------------------*------------------------*------------------------
 Joseph L. "Chepe" Lockett  |"Nullum magnum ingenium | GURPS fan, Amiga user,
http://www.io.com/~jlockett | sine mixtura dementiae | Shakespearean scholar,
  Email: jlockett@io.com    | fuit." -- Seneca       | actor and director.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 6 Sep 1997 18:53:26 -0500
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: Traveller: The Technogeeking

Doug Berry wrote:

>
>>At last, Harold said:
>>>   No, no the *real* nightmare scenario would be Wizards of the
>>>Coast....  :-0
>>
>>Yeah, they'd fire all of the designers right before Christmas.
>
>No, the real Nightmare would be if White Wolf got a hold of Traveller..
>
>"I'm Clan Merchant, and I'm having angst over my loss of cargo..."
>- --

	Strangely enough, I can't shake the idea of a Vampire/Traveller
crossover campaign.  After having played in several of Ross's Vampire
campaigns (that's where the SAN loss came from), I can think of nothing
more comforting to have in the World of Darkness than BD-14 and a FGMP:
"Stakes?  We don't need no stinking TL-0 pointy sticks!  Dominate _THIS_,
bloodsucker! [SFX: FGMP discharge, followed by vapourizing vampire
noises]".  Or any number of the other Trav Really Big Guns(tm) or Funky
High-Tech Widgets(tm).

	It should be noted that in order to convert T4 weapons for use in
the StoryTeller, all you have to do is multiply the number of damage dice
by 2.  It seems to be a pretty straight across the board conversion.
Likewise, divide stats by 3 and skills by 1.5 rounding up and you get a
nice quick& dirty conversion factor.  Psionics could be easily translated
as well; the only problem would be dealing with Disciplines/High-TL
TechnoToy interactions, such as whether Dominate and Presence work through
psionic shields or BD visors and so forth.

	It'd be fun, actually; the whole WoD gothgloomangsting thing can
get kinda old on you, and right now I'm in a serious gearhead mankind
overcoming hostile environments with high tech sorta mood...  at a
sufficiently high TL, dealing with vampire infestations shouldn't be a
problem :).

Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 6 Sep 1997 17:51:56 -0500 (CDT)
From: Joseph "Chepe" Lockett <jlockett@io.com>
Subject: Re: CT, Mega, TNE, T4, and then GURPS

First and most important: I do _not_ want to start a system flamewar.
Heck, I'd even rather not clutter the list with an argument over systems:
the Great Task Debate was a complete yawner for me.  But I want to address
some of the common misstatements below:

Quoth Daniel Poulin:
> Although I don't like the Gurps system (it is a horrible system,
> especially for combat - they can last for hours!!!! (especially if the
> two players have armour))

Combat in GURPS can indeed take a long time: if you have an inexperienced
GM trying to use the full-bore combat rules with all the available options.
But the rules are modular: you can take on as much complexity as you like,
or even vary it for different situations or dramatic needs.  FWIW, I find
GURPS one of the easiest systems for "roll and shout"-style refereeing.

> The two systems... are completely different.  One is a character generation
> system (it ensures that no two characters are alike) while the other one
> is a character creation system (players have a tendency to reproduce the
> same character time after time).

Many folks argue whether this is a bug or a feature.  To me, it would be a
problem with the players (and referee) as much as with the system.  Why
shouldn't players play characters they feel comfortable with and enjoy?
If the referee wants a change, set up a campaign that requires different
character types.

> Also, GURPS is a system prone to abuse.  Some experienced players will
> always succeed in getting the most out of every points.  Some advantages
> are horrible for game balance (Eidetic memory at 60 points is an
> example: never, ever, let your player take it).

Again, you just need to have a referee with some spine.  ANY system is
prone to abuse by experienced players or those without a firm and decisive
referee.  I recall CT players (not in my group!) who set up computer
programs to roll until producing the ideal Scout, and then insisted on
being allowed to play that character.  That said, Eidetic Memory is prone
to abuse above the 100-point level in GURPS, and may well see significant
alterations in the fourth edition, whenever that sees the light of day.
I forbid the advantage in my own campaigns, and have a less-expensive
advantage for those who want the "photographic memory" part of the package.

Enough on systems.  Now for a few of my own thought on setting:

> I find it sad that the rebellion won't be used as a background.  That means
> that Norris and everything he represents for the Spinward Marches (you have
> to admit that the man is bigger than life and a great hero to have in a
> campaign) will not happen.

Wasn't Norris a great enough hero in the Fifth Frontier War?  The man still
"exists" (as much as a fictional character can be said to do so!) -- he'll
just have different challenges to face.  Sixth Frontier War?  Vargr corsairs
inspired by DGP's "utovogh" (sp?) media/propaganda?  The Aslan ihatei could
still show up, even without the Rebellion, and harass Imperial client states
in Trojan Reach.  Megacorporate trade wars?  Sword World terrorists?

> The possibility for adventuring in a fractured Imperium will disappear
> (the cloak and dagger kind of adventure).

It's always been there.  Megacorporate espionage, or stealing secrets in
neutral territory (viz. the Federation of Arden) are easy enough in the
"Classic" setting.  I _loved_ FASA's "Ordeal by Esha'ar" when it came out:
diplomatic wrangling and espionage on a hostile planet with mysterious
natives.

> The Rebellion was bigger than life, it forced players to ask moral
> questions about their presence in the universe of Traveller.  It also
> allowed for major surprises....

All of which CT also allowed.  Is the Zhodani Consulate an ideal society
or a sordid dystopia?  Does it matter if the Aslan are "really" a major
race or not?  What was the secret of the Ancients?

> One last word: any hope of SJG getting 2300 or Dark Conspiracy ;-)

I wish I wish I wish.  Tantalus doesn't seem to be doing diddly with the
properties (aside from the Minion Hunter boardgame, which they appear to
have Internetified).

- ----------------------------*------------------------*------------------------
 Joseph L. "Chepe" Lockett  |"Nullum magnum ingenium | GURPS fan, Amiga user,
http://www.io.com/~jlockett | sine mixtura dementiae | Shakespearean scholar,
  Email: jlockett@io.com    | fuit." -- Seneca       | actor and director.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 6 Sep 1997 19:57:31 -0400 (EDT)
From: Dave Biggs <dbiggs@magicnet.net>
Subject: Margaret and slavery???

At 11:24 PM 9/5/97 -0400, you wrote:

>surprises: Margaret and slavery (she at first appeared to be the one to
>restore the Imperium, she turned out to be quite scummy), the true nature

Now I missed that one.  I thought I had all the official history type books,
where did the truth about Margaret come from?  Could you tell me what book?

Dave Biggs
dbiggs@magicnet.net
"Sauron" on FIBS, NOBS, GG, and IBS

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 06 Sep 1997 20:00:34 -0500
From: Jimmy Simpson <nimrod@dfw.net>
Subject: What's New? (Was: Cartoon Nostalgia)

At 05:20 PM 8/26/97 PST, you wrote:
>In mail you write:
>>
>>         Yup, I remember that one.  One of my fave cartoons ever done in a
>> TSR publications was one of those color strips in the back of Dragon
>> magazine, where they were expounding on the differences between fantasy and
>> SF rpgs, like where weapons come from ("Forged 10,000 years ago on the
>> battleground of Z'Blnith, this wand..."/"This blaster?  Sears.  23.95 on
>> sale.") and so forth.  Anyone remember it?
>>
>> It was Phil Foglio's What's New, explaining the dif between fantasy and SF
>
>The collected "What's New" were printed in a single volume 5-10 years
>ago. I've got a copy somewhere.
>-- 
>Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
>

The collected What's New? 1 & 2 were published in 1991 & 1994.  They can be
ordered from Studio Foglio at http://www.studiofoglio.com/ along with his
hilarious comic Buck Godot.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 6 Sep 1997 18:51:14 -0800
From: Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca>
Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller announced....

>Never before has Traveller blatantly published a
>setting that refuted something that had been published before.

TNE: Thruster plates never existed
T4: TL 15 Second Imperium

In any case, TNE has not become invalidated (or at least, no more
invalidated than it ever was). The GURPS Traveller posting specifically
stated the new game will take place in an "alternate timeline" and will not
follow canon.

>So before all the anti-TNEers go crowing that this is how it should have
>been all along, just remember, your setting has just as much chance of
>becoming invalidated as the TNE setting has.

1: This is how it should have been all along.

2: I lose as little sleep over my campaign setting "becoming invalidated"
as I do over the TL 14 vacc suits in Anomalies.

- --
Richard Hough
rdhough@orca.bc.ca

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 6 Sep 1997 18:42:45 -0800
From: Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca>
Subject: Re: Tech Levels

>TECH LEVEL GROUPS
>	TL Groups	Title
>	-   0	NoTech=09
>	1 -   3	VLoTech
>	4 -   6	LoTech=09
>	7 -   9	MidTech=09
>	10 - 12	HiTech=09
>	13 - 15	VHiTech
>	16 - 18	UHiTech

I don't think these titles are meaningful or useful. They are only remotely
accurate around Sylea in M:0. They would be completely wrong in a campaign
in a different setting or milieu. Even in M:0 they don't describe what the
technolgy or society can do. If I heard that a planet was "HiTech" I would
have to look up TL 11 or whatever to see what it actually meant.

I think the tech level titles should be somewhat descriptive, perhaps the
scale of civilization or industry the tech can sustain. How about these:

TECH LEVEL GROUPS
	TL	Title
	0	Nomadic
	1 - 3	Agrarian
	4 - 6	Industrial
	7 - 9	Planetary
	10 - 12	Stellar
	13 - 15	Nucleonic
	16 - 18	Galactic

- --
Richard Hough
rdhough@orca.bc.ca

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 07 Sep 1997 01:51:39 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: Re: Re:Plague of Duskir etc.

On Sat, 6 Sep 1997 16:19:56 -0400, you wrote:

>Date: Sat, 6 Sep 1997 21:58:03 +0200 (METDST)
>From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
>Subject: Re: Plague of Duskir etc.
>
>Phillip McGregor writes:
>>>They would know how to guard against its spread (always assuming, of
>>>course, that the incubation period didn't run into years). Not much 
>>>help when dealing with a massive number of carriers.
>> 
>>I can't think of too many really majorly lethal diseases that have incubation
>>times in years -- 
>
>I think maybe that's one way I have another attitude to canon than you do.
>You seem to insist that if a theory is more plausible than canon, then it
>is to be preferred to canon. There I disagree with you. IMO, once something

Well, yes and no. Since even "canon" doesn't actually provide us with a lot of
"fact" on anything much at all, and since it has proven fairly mutable over the
years, and since it is (when you consider it closely) the Third Imperium's
*official* version of events that (in this case) happened thousands of years
before, and before the Long Night as well, then you can see that the validity of
*anything* that is canon can *always* be called into doubt *if* there is a more
plausible explanation.

>is established as a fact, a sort of reverse burden of proof applies. In
>order to reject a canonical fact it must be completely implausible, not just
>more implausible than some other possibility. After all, historically, some 
>pretty long shots have come off once in a while.

So, you still believe in Solar Powered multiple JDrives (Annic Nova) and Jump
Torpedoes (Leviathan?). They were *canon* in their day. And they *still* aren't
all that implausible given the fact that, as I said, "canon" is pretty fast and
loose with the number of "facts" we have to play with.

And you accept the revisionistic nature of claims about the nature of TL16
Darrian tech in the Regency Handbook. In Darrians (and all previously canonical
material) TL16 ships were a quantum leap better than those of the Imperium, as
were their weapons. Suddenly, without any real and acceptable explanation, they
were a minor incremental improvement of no real significance in the Regency.
Talk about a complete about face!

>I'll expand on this theme a bit further down. Meanwhile, the fact that we
>don't know of any disease that behaves just the way that is needed to
>explain some odd canonical fact is no proof that such a disease couldn't
>exist. 

No. Sure. But just because some Vilani nationalist claims that the PoD was a
megaplague several thousand years later, on ghu knows what sort of evidence that
still exists, do we believe him?

Think of the controversy (ongoing) of where all the people went after the
collapse of the Roman Empire in the west. For many hundreds of years historians
who studied the area believed and claimed that there was a massive die back
(just as with the PoD), but in more recent (basically postwar) times Historians
have looked at the available facts and records carefully and have come to the
conclusion that there never was any real die back ... certainly anywhere near
the scale that previous generations of historians claimed.

In that sense, even Traveller "canon" ... ESPECIALLY when it makes comments on
events far in the past ... is *very* mutable. If IG (or SJG) ever do a Milieu:
Interstellar Wars and they *there* state, as *local historians on the spot* that
the Vilani were completely medically defenceless from day #1, that the TC and
the Military *deliiberately* ignored this vulnerability and *let* tens of
billions die of easily preventable diseases, and that Estigarribbia et al didn't
give a damn about the Vilani they allegedly staged the coup to protect (or were
simply too incompetent to actually *do* anything to protect them from something
that was so bleeding obvious), then, I guess, I'd have to believe it.

However, they'd have a hard row to hoe. Sort of like getting anyone who a) knows
anything about computers and b) anything about how trusting in basic nature
human beings are to believe in the garbage of Virus (converting non-living
silicon computer chips into living ones by radio messages ... get real!) and the
mutual suicide pact of "we don't need no steenking security ... we just have to
trust everybody because we're all Imperial citizens, and we can ignore external
threats as well." Not to mention the ridiculously short time span of collapse
and recovery in the RefCol ... and the ridiculously overblown effects of a 70
year hiatus in the areas the RefCol is recontacting.

And, of course, if we're arguing "canon", then where does *Gateway* fit in?
Answer: It doesn't. It directly contradicts "canon".

>>The only way that I can see your "solution" being an actual solution is
>>if you are prepared to ditch the idea of the vulnerability of the Vilani 
>>immune system (which I realise isn't yours, but you *have* supported it) 
>>as it would  seem to contradict it -- to me, at least.
>
>I don't follow your logic here (But I'll be happy to ditch that theory if
>a better one comes along).

You accept Annic Nova was "canon" and that "Leviathan" was canon? And that
"Darrians" was "canon" ... and you accept (I presume) the complete about face
that took place to contradict each and every one of these? *IF* Gateway is
canonical (and IG allowed it to be republished with no change in this important
aspect, so they had a chance to bring it into line if they had wanted, and only
a modest change would have been needed to do so), then it makes a mockery of the
previous canon of Vilani vulnerability to Terran diseases, as does the character
creation system of all versions of Traveller ... there is no provision for
racial Vilani to be susceptible to Terran diseases to a much greater extent than
Terrans.

I'd call both of those things pretty obvious flaws in the *canon* of the PoD.

>>>There's another possibility. That either the Terran state-of-the-art
>>>medical knowledge was not capable of dealing with these problems (which
>>>would indicate that the theory of one particular, hitherto unknown,
>>>problem present in Vilani and not in Terrans were responsible) or the
>>>really state-of-the-art technology was not available. Perhaps TL 13
>>>medical technology requires Really Big Machines. Machinery that just
>>>wasn't available at first on even TL 11 planets.
>> 
>>This seems to be drawing a *very* long bow -- I mean, how different *are* 
>>the Vilani? Are they a different species? This is not the case as we know 
>>that they were capable of interbreeding with other minor human races and 
>>with Terrans.
>
>No, but so what? The Amerindians weren't nearly as different from the 
>Europeans as we know the Vilani are from Terrans.

And, assuming that they had had them at the time, modern antibiotics would have
KO'ed any bacterial diseases that the Amerindians may have picked up from the
invaders. Then consider the reverse, it seems pretty certain that syphilis (or
is it gonorrhea) is a *reverse* import from the Amerindians ... and *it* is
treatable easily with antibiotics.

And you're still missing the point -- it doesn't matter *how* different the
Vilani are or aren't ... the diseases that they are subject to don't change. If
Terrans who get them can be treated successfully with antibiotics and
antivirals, then Vilani will be as well. It doesn't make any difference how weak
(or otherwise) the Vilani immune system is in face of these diseases, as long as
the antibiotics and antivirals are available the diseases will have minimal
impact.

>>We can deal with diseases in Terran organisms here and now even if they 
>>aren't human ... that's what Veterinarians do all the time. Yet here you 
>>are suggesting that Vilani have some unique difference that makes them 
>>not only susceptible to Terran diseases *but* also makes them somehow 
>>able to transform the diseases into a form that cannot be treated with 
>>standard treatments (antibiotics and ativirals) ... after all, the 
>>bacteria and viruses are the problem, and *they* haven't changed. 
>
>How can you say that? 50 years ago penicillin was a wonder drug that cured
>most any infection. Nowadays more and more penicillin-resistent strains of
>bacteria appear. Any bug that survives living with humans while they
>evolve TL 13 medical drugs will have a chance of adapting to those drugs.
>Some won't make it, of course. But some will, and those that has the best
>chance of surviving are those that don't harm their host and thereby avoid
>getting targeted. And those are particularily the ones that would attack
>the Vilani: the bugs that the Terrans carried around without being bothered
>by them.

Even though Penicillin is now reduced in effectiveness, the diseases that it
treated are now treatable with different antibiotics, and there is an ongoing
race to develop new antibiotics to replace these newer ones. Unless *all*
diseases develop into something like VRE (antibiotic resistant golden staph), in
which case the Terrans will have been ravaged by disease as much as the Vilani,
and no new developments are made in disease fighting tech, then the assumption
must be (and it is in the game system) that disease will never be a significant
problem for any of the various brands of interstellar humanity. Even in Milieu
0, the same TL as the Terrans who beat the ZS, they have no problems with
disease -- and they are limited to the same tech! Sorry, like I said, you're
drawing an extra long bow here.

>>>You're postulating that the ability to recognize a problem gives the
>>>ability to solve it in short order. There's plenty of AIDS and cancer
>>>researchers that won't agree with you.
>> 
>>Well, the Vilani *do* have computers. And they *have* had them for a *very* 
>>long time. And if people start dying we can reasonahly assume that basic 
>>folk knowledge of such unusual (but not rare) medical problems will be 
>>enough to trigger database searches.
>
>Yes, we can assume that the Vilani would be able to recognize a disease for
>what it is rather than an evil spell. That dosen't mean they will be able
>to develop a cure in time to do any good.

But they will be able to understand that Quarantine works. Statistics, as I have
pointed out previously, was as important (actually, it was *more* important!)
than the microscope in developing the Germ Theory of disease and proving it.
Since the Vilani have computers, they will in short order see the way in which
the disease spreads and be able to counter/prevent its spread by quarantine
procedures. Which is all rather meaningless, because they use the Terran
supplied antibiotics and antivirals to treat anyone who might be exposed anyway.

>>>OK, that makes sense. Let's assume that the Vilani did have an immune system 
>>>equivalent to heir minor human subjects. That leaves several possibilities:
>>>
>>>The other minor races that the Terrans encountered had similar problems. It
>>>just wasn't mentioned specifically, since the Vilani constituted by far the
>>>most of the victims. Or, the Vilani was suceptible to something carried by
>>>the Terrans and the rest wasn't. Pure chance, nothing else.
>> 
>>Which still doesn't explain how Terran treatments don't work -- 
>
>It works this way: You invent an antibiotic. You use it. Eventually some bugs
>comes along that has developed an immunity to said drug. You then invent a 
>better one and the cycle continues. In the meantime all Terrans carry around 
>something we'll call Bug A. Bug A is a harmless little critter that gives
>you a mild fever when you first contract it whereafter you become immune to
>it and carries it around with no ill effect to show for it. One day you get
>infected by Bug B, a nasty little critter that causes swollen joints and
>sore throat. You dose it with Wonder Drug and keep on dosing until you've

My understanding is that antibiotics tend to be pretty specific. Take e coli,
for example, normal antibiotic treatments have no discernible effect on its
symbiotic presence in the human gut at all. Sure, there are *some* antibiotics
that will kill it off when treating something else, and you will need to swallow
e coli capsules to repopulate your gut, but the diseases in question are pretty
rare ... limited, effectively, to third world (and worse) conditions, and not
all that common even there. So most of these "minor" diseases will not be
affected by antibiotics in the way you suggest -- they will never gain the
resistance you suggest.

>Then one day you go along to Dingir, breathe on a Vilani, and give him Bug A,
>which has a much nastier effect on him. And when you try to treat him with
>Wonder Drug and Super Wonder Drug and Super Collossal Wonder Drug, you find
>that Bug A is immune to everything you can throw at it.

As I said, this isn't the way it works. Unless you posit that the WD, SWD and
SCWD have no effect on Terrans for many diseases as well, and this is not the
case.

>>>I still question your basic assumption that the Terran TL 13 medical
>>>knowledge was a magic wand that could cure everything. Propably they
>>>could deal with most of the problems. But it only takes one areosol-
>>>transmitted fatal disease with an incubation period of a few weeks per
>>>planet. The Terrans must have been carrying hundreds or thousands of
>> 
>>These antibiotics and antivirals are hardly difficult to produce -- and 
>>local tech could easily be converted. 
>
>If the Vilani medical technology lags behind their general TL 11 by one or
>two and the bugs have adapted to TL 13 remedies, then it is quite possible
>that you couldn't adapt the Vilani technology.

Producing Antibiotics and Antivirals, given any sort of industrial base at all,
will never be a problem. There will be a lag due to retooling and converting -
or putting Terran designs into Vilani production software - but this will easily
be overcome as the Terrans will have made plans to ensure that supplies of said
antibiotics and antivirals are on hand for just such a purpose.

Remember, the Terrans had been fighting (and had occupied) Vilani worlds for
hundreds of years before the collapse. They *KNEW* what was likely to happen
from this experience -- and it still boils down to the requirement that you
believe the Terrans and Terran Military *DELIBERATELY* allowed the PoD to happen
by making no preparations. There is no possible *economic* reason to allow this,
unless you assume really base, vile, brutal and active Terran planning to allow
it to happen. Sorry, I don't believe that even the Solomani of CTrav would be so
vile -- they want dem slaves, massa.

>>And are you arguing that the Terrans had no idea of the problem or its 
>>magnitude -- we *are* talking a military coup based government, and the 
>>military are notorious for having contingency plans for *everything*. 
>>And they had fought the Vilani and occupied their worlds for over a 
>>century -- so the problem would not have been new or unknown. 
>
>I checked the sources last night, and according to TD#20 the first
>infections came from Terran POWs.

Sure, and the Vilani had had Terran POWs for hundreds of years. Yet the PoD only
started well *after* the collapse of the ZS. Again, are you seriously proposing
a deliberate and vile Terran plan to more than decimate their new
slaves/subjects/citizens? I don't think that this can be justified on what we
know. If the Terrans were truly so vile, then the PoD would have occured
sometime after the 1st Interstellar War, and would have been much more lethal
than even the Vilani apologists whose "stab in the back theory" this almost
certainly is, claim.

>>Occam's razor means that either the Terrans deliberately spread the 
>>disease(s) (and, as I explained above, this doesn't make economic sense) 
>>or that they were so vastly incompetent that they could not possibly have 
>>beaten the Vilani (or anybody else) -- or, more likely, that there never 
>>was any Plague of Duskir, and that it was really a Vilani "stab in the 
>>back" excuse.
>
>That explanation isn't very good when you consider that the story comes
>from Solomani sources (_Rats&Cats_) and isn't mentioned at all in _Cogs&
>Dogs_. If there are any mythmaking involved then the plagues really was
>deliberately introduced and the _Solomani_ are trying to cover it up ;-).

Which still begs the question. Were the Terrans vile and/or incompetent? Or is
it a *Solomani* (i.e. 3rd Imperium Solomani) claim to make *them* seem nasty and
vicious and keep the 3I off their backs out of fear?

>>Then you agree that the problem is (or has probably been) blown out of all
>>proportion by Vilani apologists -- in their variation of the "stab in the 
>>back" theory. "We would have beaten the dastardly Terrans except that they 
>>didn't play fair, and used diseases to deliberately destroy our society." ???
>
>No, I don't. What we have here is a canonical fact (lots of Vilani died) and
>a canonical explanation. You claim that it couldn't have happened that way.
>Maybe you're right. If so, we have a fact and an explanation that dosen't
>make sense. Now, some people, and I suspect that it is the kind you think
>of as 'canon-heads', would say "I don't care if it is impossible, canon says
>it happened, so it happened". I share your disdain for that attitude. If
>something dosen't make sense, then it should be changed to something that
>does. But you want to "explain" it by, essentially, saying: "It didn't 
>happen at all". I hope you won't take offense, but I have only a little 
>more respect for that attitude. My inclination is to say: "It happened, but 
>perhaps not in quite that way and not for quite those reasons". In other 
>words, to change as little as possible of the previously published facts.

So, like I said, you agree in multiple Jump Drives and Solar Powered Jump Drives
(as per Annic Nova), Jump Torpedoes (as per Leviathan) and the several orders of
magnitude better than TL15 of TL16?

No, I'm not saying it didn't happen at all. Its even possible that on some
planets it was quite bad. However, overall, I would expect that it would be
lucky if 3-5% of the population died -- and probably not of any disease, per se,
but of side effects resulting from the perfectly normal social chaos that
inevitably follows such an event as the Terran victory over the ZS. It seems to
me what we most likely have is an "Other Losses" type of controversy -- someone
who wasn't there and who hasn't or won't (or can't, because the 2000 year old
records don't exist) check looking at a column "Other Losses" and extrapolating
vile nastiness where none, in fact, exists. This is a much more likely
explanation.

>Now, maybe I'm doing you an injustice. Goodness knows that there are facts
>that I can't explain in any way (How the Aslan _ihatei_ managed to conquer
>Tobia and why Norris allowed the Vargr to encroach on the Domain of Deneb,
>for two examples), and in both cases I'm willing to argue that "It didn't
>happen at all". If that is the way things are for you here  --  that you
>would prefer to find a plausible explanation, but haven't been able to --
>then I think it could be worthwhile to continue the discussion. But if you 
>actually prefer "It didn't happen at all" to "It happened, but not quite
>that way", then I think we should just agree to disagree.

No, what I have been *meaning* to say all along (and thought I *was* saying :-{
was that the PoD was vastly overrated ... which seems to me to be "It happened,
but not quite that way."

>>But we have no "evidence" of massive die offs, and a lot of circumstantial
>>evidence to show why it would be unlikely to have occurred at all.
>
>Yes we have. _S&A_ may have been viewpoint writing (and you'll still have
>to come up with an explanation why a Solomani is spouting Vilani claptrap),
>but the article in TD#20 is pure authorial voice. According to that the
>plagues killed over a billion people on several thousand worlds.
>
>(As an aside, this works out at an average of 500,000+ people per planet.
>Undoubtedly there were planets with a lot more than the average number of
>deaths, but if the plagues really did leave Solomani immigrants as the
>majority on some planets, then many Vilani planets must have had
>populations down in the 10s of millions; something I've argued for before.)

A billion people in an empire of 10000 worlds! This is a "massive" die off? The
worst plague in human history -- the Spanish Flu at the end of WW1 -- was worse
than this! Is *this* what we've been arguing about? It sounds more and more like
a historical misinterpretation of an "Other Losses" or collapse of population
after collapse of Roman Empire kind ... some minor thing being blown out of all
proportion!
 
>>>That one is no problem. I think "Rats&Cats" even give the explanation. The
>>>Vilani that are alive in 1100 are descended from those Vilani whose
>>>immume systems were a bit stronger than those of those who died.
>> 
>>But even then they should be much more vulnerable to Terran diseases than any
>>Terran given the arguments you are supporting re their weakened immune system.
>
>That's just not true. If the present day Vilani are descended from the part
>of their predecessors that were stronger than the norm, then it is perfectly
>plausible that they are stronger too. And, of course, there has been
>considerable contact with Terrans _since_ the Plague.

But the argument is that all Vilani had an immune system that had atrophied for
250,000 or more years in the absence of contact with Terran disease organs
(something I dispute, but you don't). Thus, if you are arguing a statistical
quirk that means some Vilani have a useful immune response, we wouldn't be
talking a mere 500,000 per planet dying, we would be talking perhaps a 90% or
more die back. Since we're obviously not, then it seems that all Vilani must
have had the immunity -- rusty, perhaps, but there waiting to be triggered.

>>>No, they will handle those bacteria that have not adapted to the anti-
>>>biotica. Diseases adapt too. That is something you seem to forget.
>> 
>>This seems obtuse -- the Terrans in the game and the medical science that 
>>is given does not have any problem handling diseases. 
>
>I think that in the heat of the discussion you've forgotten that exotic 
>diseases is a stable of Science Fiction and has been the basis of quite a
>few Amber Zones. Not only is there plenty of evidence that Milieu 1100 
>medical knowledge and technology is not perfect, but the loss of plot
>potential if medicine _was_ perfect is such that if the rules said it
>was perfect, I would argue to change that, and canon be damned ;-) 

So? We still don't have PoD's with 90% or greater kill rates on all people in
the vicinity. Which is what the Gateway Plague assumes -- which is where the
whole argument started. You will probably have Spanish Flu equivalents (the
Spanish Flu wiped out as many people as WW1, but more evenly spread -- perhaps
1.5% of the world population at the time, all in about 12-18 months) ... nasty,
but not 100% lethal in weeks.

>>We know that there is ongoing research into antibiotics and antivirals 
>>for the very reasons that you suggest -- and that a variant of the disease 
>>that was (a) lethal enough to be rendered immune to antibiotics ... i.e. 
>>it had to be treated with antibiotics will (b) be lethal to Terrans also, 
>>perhaps not *as* lethal, but lethal nonetheless (otherwise they would not 
>>have used antibiotics against it in the first place).
>
>As I argued above, a bug can be exposed to antibiotics without being the
>target (And, in fact, is much more likely to develop immunity if it isn't).
>Socondly, I don't think anyone are making any serious effort to stamp out
>measels, yet measels were lethal to the Amerindians (Or am I thinking
>about some other childhood disease?).

And I have explained why this is simply not likely.

>Since the Vilani isn't pushing any "stab in the back" claims (that's just
>your theory, remember? You can't use a theory to prove itself) the Solomani
>dosen't have to defend themselves. And, as I said, a disease can be lethal
>to one group of people and utterly innocuous to another group. 

OK, its some Solomani academic who is pushing an "Other Losses" theory that, for
its own reasons, the 3I is prepared to support. Probably the Solomani themselves
think the guy is a crackpot -- so what is the 3I's reason for this? Seems pretty
obvious -- they want to demonise the Solomani, which goes great with the
reconquest of Earth!

Phil
- ---------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU)
Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)
Designer, Standard Role Playing (PGD)

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1788
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Sunday, September 7 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1789



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1
Re: Jump in Traveller
Re: Tech Levels
Re: GrrrrrrrrPS
Re: Traveller: The Technogeeking
Re: GURPS Trav (T-5?)
Re: GURPS Traveller announced....
Re: Battle dress turtles
Infantry
Plague of Duskir etc.
GURPS Traveller - Physical Product
Re: Margaret and slavery???
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1784
Re: CT, Mega, TNE, T4, and then GURPS
Re: GURPS Traveller
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1763
Re: Plague of Technovamps

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 01 Sep 1997 05:36:24 -0400
From: Eric Freitas <edf@atlantic.net>
Subject: Re: Tactical Action Combat System ver 2.1

At 12:17 PM 8/29/97 +0000, you wrote:
>Do plasma weapons shoot out a smallish 'bolt' of plasma at very high 
>speeds?  What would that look like?  I would guess that it would just 
>be a small, very bright, line if the speed is that high (1000's of 
>m/s?)

I think that it would look alot like fast moving ball lightning.  Some
television show last week showed an amatuer filming of a lightning 
storm in which a red-orange ball of fire moving at very high speed
was captured by the camera.  It may look something like that.

I really doubt that a plasma weapon would cause blowthrough on a 
human target.  Imagine a ball of gas the temperature of the suns
surface washing over a person for a split second.  Due to atmospheric
dispersion, even a near miss may be enough to critically wound
a person as the superheated ions & air brush him/her.

Eric Freitas

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 08 Sep 1997 00:15:19 -0400
From: "Michael D. Peters" <Letterworks@Comten.com>
Subject: Re: Jump in Traveller

In reply to Marc Bruce Alan Macintosh wrote:

> >Standing Jump. Standard practice is for ships to do a standing jump
> >(jump with zero velocity)
> You might want to note that most whole star systems are moving
> with respect to each other at ~10-300 km/s (plus an average of
> 30 km/s for the mainworld's orbital velocities), so if you wnat to
> do a "standing jump" you actually accelerate a little to pre-match
> velocities with your target system.
>

Later Leaonard Erickson also replied:

> >  ASTROGATION
> >         The Astrogator's responsibility is to determine a usable
> > course and to plot it with the help of the ship's computer. All
> > calculation takes place before the jump begins.
> >         Commercial Ship Astrogation. The course is plotted for a
> > standing jump which will emerge at 100 diameters from the
> destination
> > world.
> >         Complex Astrogation. The course is plotted for a running jump
> > which will emerge with the ship at full speed aimed at the
> > destination world (and the ship then decelerates all the way to the
> > destination world).
>
> We also need to know how accurately you can plot the exit position.
> That is, how accurately can we pick an exit point.
>
> BTW, you need to point out that if you exit 5 hours late or early, the
> planet has *moved* 5 hours worth of orbital motion. For earth, that's
> 540,000 km!

Marc,

For reasons already statedd by these two fine gentlemen I would also
like to suggest that you concider adding a secction to your Jump rules
concerning Jumps into unknown systems. I have always assumed that known
systems have tables in the computer to calculate compensation factors
between known systems. For entry into systems for which the ship has no
table something along the lines of a Formidable Task should be used.
In my own games I have Scout Auctions where navigation information,
along with other relevant information is sold to Merchants. Often along
with the information the Merchant can purchase an Imperial Limited
Charter, granting exclusive rights, for a limited period, usualy 1-2
years, to conduct trade.
Anyway, I believe that having some factor that makes it much more
difficult to "leap into the Unknow" should be in effect since it adds
spice to the Astrogation skill set.
Just thought I throw this into the mix.
Mike Peters
Letterworks@Comten.com

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 06 Sep 97 23:54:14 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: Tech Levels

On 09/06/97 at 06:42 PM,  Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca> said:

>>TECH LEVEL GROUPS
>>	TL Groups	Title
>>	-   0	NoTech=09
>>	1 -   3	VLoTech
>>	4 -   6	LoTech=09
>>	7 -   9	MidTech=09
>>	10 - 12	HiTech=09
>>	13 - 15	VHiTech
>>	16 - 18	UHiTech

Well, my usage is:

 0      Primitive
 1 - 2  Pre-Industrial
 3 - 6  Industrial
 7 - 8  Solar
 9 - A  Pre-Stellar
 B - C  Early Stellar
 D - F  Stellar
 G+     High Stellar

Eris

- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 6 Sep 1997 18:04:37 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: GrrrrrrrrPS

In mail you write:

> No, the real Nightmare would be if White Wolf got a hold of Traveller..
>
> "I'm Clan Merchant, and I'm having angst over my loss of cargo..."

Actually, I can almost *see* the scene when some Vampires take passage
on the player's ship. 

Don't put down other games. Steal any ideas that look usable, and file
off the serial numbers.

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 6 Sep 1997 18:11:13 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Traveller: The Technogeeking

In mail you write:

>         Strangely enough, I can't shake the idea of a Vampire/Traveller
> crossover campaign.  After having played in several of Ross's Vampire
> campaigns (that's where the SAN loss came from), I can think of nothing
> more comforting to have in the World of Darkness than BD-14 and a FGMP:
> "Stakes?  We don't need no stinking TL-0 pointy sticks!  Dominate _THIS_,
> bloodsucker! [SFX: FGMP discharge, followed by vapourizing vampire
> noises]".  Or any number of the other Trav Really Big Guns(tm) or Funky
> High-Tech Widgets(tm).
>
>         It should be noted that in order to convert T4 weapons for use in
> the StoryTeller, all you have to do is multiply the number of damage dice
> by 2.  It seems to be a pretty straight across the board conversion.
> Likewise, divide stats by 3 and skills by 1.5 rounding up and you get a
> nice quick& dirty conversion factor.  Psionics could be easily translated
> as well; the only problem would be dealing with Disciplines/High-TL
> TechnoToy interactions, such as whether Dominate and Presence work through
> psionic shields or BD visors and so forth.
>
>         It'd be fun, actually; the whole WoD gothgloomangsting thing can
> get kinda old on you, and right now I'm in a serious gearhead mankind
> overcoming hostile environments with high tech sorta mood...  at a
> sufficiently high TL, dealing with vampire infestations shouldn't be a
> problem :).

Never forget that if *you* can use the goodies, so can the other side.

Consider what vampiric strength and speed can do augmented by BD. And I
have no doubt that they'll figure out how to technologically augment
their other special abilities.

Heck, you can "explain" all the vampires, werewolves, etc as being
minor human races from planets where something strange happened. :-)

Nightmare of the week: A Zhodani teleport commando who has been
vampirized *and* bitten by a werewolf. 

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 6 Sep 1997 17:58:00 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: GURPS Trav (T-5?)

In mail you write:

> At 04:53 AM 9/6/97 -0800, you wrote:
>>Craig Berry wrote
>
>>> No, no, no.  Grandfather is *new* Cthulhu.  However, when he was
>>> introduced, public reaction was very unfavorable, so the original was
>>> returned to the market as Cthulhu Classic.  Don't even ask about the dark
>>> inner mysteries of Diet Cthulhu, and (*shudder*) the legendary Cthulhu
>>> Free...
>>
>>You got Cthulhu for free ?  I had to pay about $28 for my Cthulhu plush
>>when I ordered him from Pagan publishing but he was well worth it.  If
>>anyone tells you that you are too old for stuffed animals they don't
>>know about the great Great Cthulhu plush.  (I will admit that I am
>>somewhat frustrated by the inability of the plush to cause SAN loses).
>
> I got a hold of some of the plush Cthuthlu babies at PacificCon a few years
> back.. being in Chaosium's home area has it's advantages at times..
>
> As for stuffed animals, Kirsten and I own at least 3 dozen teddy bears,
> most of whom live in the bed.  You are never to old to have a happy 
> childhood.
>
> Yes, the plush Cthulthu doesn't cause SAN loss, but you can whack people
> while they're going "awww..... how CUTE!" *WHACK!*  *thud*

Well, a local fan used to make these wonderful unicorn hand puppets
(they basicly cover your whole arm almost to the shoulder). Just the
head and neck, but still quite impressive. He asked me if I wanted one.
I said "Sure. Make mine black with red eyes." He did.

Lucifer (the unicorn) has been startling people ever since. He's rude,
crude, and gets away with things I'd get my face slapped for. :-)

Hmm... I wonder what I could do with a K'Kree puppet? 

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 07 Sep 1997 16:45:38 -0900
From: Harry <paharris@postoffice.newnham.utas.edu.au>
Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller announced....

At 06:51 PM 6/09/97 -0800, you wrote:
>>Never before has Traveller blatantly published a
>>setting that refuted something that had been published before.
>
>TNE: Thruster plates never existed
>T4: TL 15 Second Imperium

That's OK, I never did like thruster plates anyway... I preferred the
romance of hot plasma propelling starships... for me that feels right! :)

>In any case, TNE has not become invalidated (or at least, no more
>invalidated than it ever was). The GURPS Traveller posting specifically
>stated the new game will take place in an "alternate timeline" and will not
>follow canon.
>
>>So before all the anti-TNEers go crowing that this is how it should have
>>been all along, just remember, your setting has just as much chance of
>>becoming invalidated as the TNE setting has.
>
>1: This is how it should have been all along.

But why should it have been this way all along, I see no problem with the
setting being changed as it has. Are you just making this point to be
funny? Or do you seriously mean this? And if you do... then I am sure that
you have probably kept it like you wanted all along! Traveller is a game
for the imagination... we do not have to slavishly follow the setting given
by GDW/IG/SJG, but use it as a guide for our own players. By providing the
four settings we have seen so far, we have been given four different
guidelines for adventuring, and better yet, support material for these
settings. The best part is that you can pick and choose what you like. I
remember reading an email form someone who had played a TNE campaign whrere
the virus did not exist, but the worlds had collapsed because of economic
reasons. 
Anyway.. what I am trying to say is that there is no way that traveller
should have been all along. If we are talking about settings, you use what
you want.    


>2: I lose as little sleep over my campaign setting "becoming invalidated"
>as I do over the TL 14 vacc suits in Anomalies.

I suspected as much. :)


Harry

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 7 Sep 1997 17:49:23 +1000 (EST)
From: David Jaques-Watson <davidjw@pcug.org.au>
Subject: Re: Battle dress turtles

Dear Folks -

David Reed asked if anyone was brave enough to give their PC's battledress.
Well, my PC's run a merc unit, so the answer is "yes".

If you don't have a combat-based game, but have a PC with those sort of
skills, run a combat game every so often to cater for their talents. Allow
that player to have battledress! Make it a campaign item and give it quirks
- - ones that encourage role-playing. Grab a copy of _The MT Journal_ #1 and
check out how to do so:
        - build a scenario around _using_ the suit
        - have them need to travel to obtain that suit's vital component
that just got shot up
        - the cameleon circiut suddenly thinks that "jungle" is
red-and-green checkerboard
        - the IR supression system starts spewing clouds of steam
Remember, it's not all-powerful, but it is one of the ultimate "magic items"
that the players want.
________________________________________________________________________
Hyphen (David Jaques-Watson)                         davidjw@pcug.org.au
http://www.tip.net.au/~davidjw
"I file things in historical order, with a hashing algorithm of gravity"

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 7 Sep 1997 10:45:57 +0100
From: "MJ Dougherty" <martinjd@globalnet.co.uk>
Subject: Infantry

I`ve just joined the digest. This my second ever E-mail attempt since
leaving the forests, so please bear with me if it`s all wrong....

Can anyone on the digest tell me where Dave Nilsen went after GDW vanished?

And some comments on military vehicles:

Grav powerplants vs tracks: Grav is really expensive compared to tracks,
and harder for low-quality troops to maintain. I`d imagine that anything
that had to move fast, like recce vehicles and frontline tanks, would merit
a grav plant. So might self-propelled guns and similar artillery. But the
cost factor might make it well worth using tracks for artillery pieces and
the like, or second-line low-mobility defensive forces. They`d be
.vulnrable to being overrun of course, but better that risk than not being
able to afford them in the first place. This is not really a factor when
buying Imperial Assault units, but for the individual world govt it`s a
viable option. TL 12 tracks should be more reliable than modern ones. God,
but I hope so!
Battle pods: You can`t win hearts and minds from inside a battlepod....
True. But you also can`t win them from a suit of batledress. What you CAN
do from inside battledress is to get into places that pods can`t go, like
buildings. Battlepods are great for the open battlefield, but what kind of.
idiot fights against them on an open field if he hasn`t got a comparable
force of his own?  They`re great for the open battlefield, but most combat
is urban now, and this trend should continue into the future. You can
devastate cities in
pods and grav tanks, but can you effectively clear them? I think not.
I`d imagine that even at very high tech there is a need for `infantry` to
do the same jobs that the PBI have always been lumbered with. In a
planetary
assault we`d see tanks and pods to clear the skies, but when it came down
to city assaults, out comes the battledress. And also, quite likely,.
cheaper unarmoured `light` infantry as scouts and holding forces. Even an
unarmoured man can, at TL 12+, carry a pretty amazing weapons kit. Besides,
the arms race always swings between armour and weapons. There may be
periods when light anti-grav armour weapons actually make grav vehicles
more vulnerable than dangerous, much as tanks have sometimes been
unstoppable and sometimes been big lumbering targets. There is always a
counter to any weapon system, and at the end of the day you can always send
in the blokes with rifles to do the job. The days of the Poor Bloody
Infantryman are not yet over....


	But that`s just my theory.
 
	Martin 

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 07 Sep 1997 22:21:49 +1200
From: Andrew Moffatt-Vallance <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Plague of Duskir etc.

Well I'm finally over my flu and ready to plunge back into the TML. To Hans,
please excuse my long sentences, I'm trying (but not suceading very well).

Lets take a pause and look at just what the PoD is in game terms. It is
a plot device to explain how the Terrans could come to totally dominate
the Ziru Sirka without being culturally extinguished by the massive weight
of Vilani numbers. If we remove the PoD, then another plot device will be
needed to explain just how the Terrans came to domiate and subvert a culture
that outnumbered them at least several thousand to one. Thats one hell of
a population gradiant to fight your way up.

So, the PoD is a part of canon, so the question is how believable is it?
Could the Vilani have been devistated by Terran diseases? If so, why?
Firstly, what was the Plague of Duskir? According to canon it was a large
number of diseases that the Terrans carried with them and took fairly much
for granted. We're talking things like measles, flu, the common cold, mumps,
rubella and especially that wonderful illness doctors call non-specific viral
infection. The important thing is that these are all viruses. While the
Vilani may well have encountered a number of bacterial infections before, the
chance that they have encountered an alien virus that can infect humans is
almost beyond belief. Why, because a virus hijacks the genetic reproduction
mechanism of the cell it infects. Any alien life is almost certainly going to
be fundimentally different on such a basic genetic level. An alien bacteria
may well be able to infect and reproduce in a human, it is beyond belief that
an alien virus would be able to do so. I know that this means that Gateway
is wrong. The solution to this is to take a big pen and were it says virus,
cross it out and write in bacteria. A bacteria will work even better than a
virus.

Now on to the Vilani immune system. Given that they have spent 300,000 years
in an environment which to all intents and purposes is sterile. Now, what
happens to the human immune system if it is not needed for 300,000 years. It
is going to weaken; no ifs buts or maybes, it will degrade; if only due to the
lack of natural selection. But even more likely, it will degrade even further
due to evolution. The immune system is an energy intensive system, those who
have a weaker immune system will have more energy to devote to other systems,
therefore on Vland, those with weaker immune systems will actually have an
evolutionary advantage over those with strong immune systems. Simple logic
dicates that after 300,000 years of this, the Vilani immune system will be
considerably weaker than that of the Terrans. So not only to the Vilani have
no natural immunity to the diseases that make up the plague, their defense
mechanism against any disease has been compromised.

Next, lets cover the Vilani response. One can assume that the Vilani would
have encountered some fairly vicious plagues early in their starfaring. And
one can at the very least assume that the Vilani would have developed a
system of quarantine to deal with them. They may have also developed some
antibotics and the like, but this is not certain and is actually irrelevant
since at the time of the PoD they have access to Terran medical technology.
So why didn't the Vilani simply quarantine to stop the plague. Because at the
time of the PoD, the Vilani weren't in charge any longer, the Terrans were.
The only way to quarantine effectively would have been to ban the movement of
Terrans to Vilani worlds (effectively quarantining the Terrans). It is not too
far fetched to assume that the Terran rulers of the RoM lacked the political
will to do this. It is unpleasant, but it is not unbelievable.

So we come to the Terran response to the PoD. Did the Terrans simply stand
aside and let billions of Vilani die? Almost certainly not, they may have been
unwilling to impose a quarantine on themselves, but they would not have stood
by and done nothing. So why was the Terran medical intervention unable to stop
the plague? This comes down to two facts. Firstly the plague agents were
viruses. How does a virus work? To put not too fine a point on it, we haven't
got the faintest idea. We know that they inject their DNA into a cell and
hijack its reproductive mechanisms; but as at 1997 we still have no idea how
they do this. Just how does a virus fool the cell's internal defenses, and how
does it take over the cell's reproductive mechanism? We are not even close to
understanding how they do this. It again is not to far fetched to assume that
the Terrans in the 23rd century still don't know. Next how do we treat viral
infections? Simple answer, we cross our fingers and hope. We have no method of
treating a viral infection, we have no antiviral drugs, not one; and we are
unlikely to get any until we understand how viruses work (even then, there are
no guarantees that we will develop them). So what do we do, treat the symptoms
and hope the immune system will stop the virus.

What about vaccinations? All vaccinations do is stimulate the production of
what are termed "memory cells". These are produced by the immune system and
remember the protein signature of a disease and allow the immune system to
respond much faster to infection. The key factor is that they rely on the
bodies own immune system. The Vilani's immune system is simply not as efficent
as the Terrans. So against Viruses there may well have been little the Terrans
could do.

The other factor with the Terran response is the shear scale of the problem.
We know that the Vilani did not have as good medical technology as the Terrans.
Plus they are not constantly involved in a day to day battle with diseases.
Assuming the Vilani do know how to manufacture vaccines, I think one can be
fairly safe in assuming that their facilities to do this will be very limited.
Now the Terrans do have extensive facilities to manufacture vaccines, but they
have to manufacuture for a population several thousand times larger than
what they have previously. Assuming the Terrans have antiviral drugs the same
limitations will apply. The Terrans could simply not produce anything like
enough drugs and vaccines to treat the plague. Those they could have to be
shipped from the Solomani Rim (this is where the Terran pharmacutical
factories are) to every world in the Ziru Sirka. A very formidable logistic
exercise (and a very expensive one). Despite what people may think, the
manufacture of pharmacuticals is a very difficult process. And I would point
out that its not a simple matter of getting a description of the manufacturing
process, realistically someone has to come and teach you how to do it. (I
remember a lengthy discussion on the TML awhile back on this exact point).

So to put it all together what have we got. We have the Vilani with a
"defective" immune system encountering a class of pathogen they have never
before encountered. We have the Terrans in control and unwilling to
quarantine themselves to prevent the spread of the viruses; and we have
insufficent resources to manufacture enough drugs and vaccines to stop the
plague. As a plot device, this all seems very reasonable to me.

  Andrew etc.
    a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz

****************************************************************************
The longest distance between two points is with children.
****************************************************************************

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 07 Sep 1997 13:06:54 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: GURPS Traveller - Physical Product

I don't know about the rest of you guys, but I've been thinking about exactly
what I want from GURPS Traveller in the sense of physical product, and have made
my suggestions to Steve Jackson who has kindly passed them on to Scott Haring.

What I said was that I would *really* like to see --

* A Hardcover GURPS Traveller with glossy paper and colour artwork a la "In
Nomine" -- or at the veryt least the softcover equivalent they also put out for
"In Nomine" ... or, even better, *both* ... and I made it plain that I would buy
*one of each* if that were the case.

Now, I don't know if this would be possible/economically viable, or if anyone
out there would have the same desire for such a product version.

*IF* you like that idea, or if you have some variant, don't keep it to yourself,
let SJ Games *know*. I would suggest that you email their general email address
rather than Steve or Scott (we don't want to have them deluged with email) ...
or perhaps email the *Pyramid* address

Pyramid@io.com

Regardless, now is the time to let them know exactly what physical format they
should produce -- I mean, if they can produce *Goblins* with glossy paper and
full colour, surely they could do it for GURPS Traveller.

Write, call, email ... but let them know your opinion and desires! And be
polite, calm and logical!

Phil
- ---------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU)
Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)
Designer, Standard Role Playing (PGD)

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 07 Sep 1997 06:40:17 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Margaret and slavery???

At 07:57 PM 9/6/97 -0400, you wrote:
>At 11:24 PM 9/5/97 -0400, you wrote:
>
>>surprises: Margaret and slavery (she at first appeared to be the one to
>>restore the Imperium, she turned out to be quite scummy), the true nature
>
>Now I missed that one.  I thought I had all the official history type books,
>where did the truth about Margaret come from?  Could you tell me what book?

It was hinted at throughout the Rebellion, but in "Arrvial Vengence" we see
her true colors.  

I spent several hours scrubbing that damn parrot of hers of my ship before
making a run for Daibei...
- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 07 Sep 1997 06:43:16 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1784

At 05:30 PM 9/6/97 -0500, you wrote:
>Quoth Phillip McGregor:
>> But remember, SJG had a White Wolf license -- until White Wolf pulled it
for
>> no better reason than the SJG products were superior (better proofreading,
>> graphics, playtesting etc.) and they were evidently worried (perhaps with
>> no real reason -- I don't have any figures, obviously!) that there were
>> (or would soon be) losing sales *themselves* as people bought the superior
>> SJG products.
>
>Actually, it was because Steve Wieck (WWGS president) and Steve Jackson
>had a major personality conflict, causing a private tiff that escalated
>into its own UseNet flame war....  Anybody remember the "battle of the two
>Steves" on rec.games.frp.misc?

Oh, yeah.... that was a good one..

I've heard form a friend who writes for White Wolf that the straw that
broke the camels back came when WW was introducing Wraith at Gencon, and
all the people came up, looked it over, and asked when the GURPS version
would be released!
- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 07 Sep 1997 10:30:49 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: Re: CT, Mega, TNE, T4, and then GURPS

Joseph "Chepe" Lockett writes:

<snip>

>> I find it sad that the rebellion won't be used as a background.  That means
>> that Norris and everything he represents for the Spinward Marches (you have
>> to admit that the man is bigger than life and a great hero to have in a
>> campaign) will not happen.
>
>Wasn't Norris a great enough hero in the Fifth Frontier War?  The man still
>"exists" (as much as a fictional character can be said to do so!) -- he'll
>just have different challenges to face.  Sixth Frontier War?  Vargr corsairs
>inspired by DGP's "utovogh" (sp?) media/propaganda?  The Aslan ihatei could
>still show up, even without the Rebellion, and harass Imperial client states
>in Trojan Reach.  Megacorporate trade wars?  Sword World terrorists?

   You're missing the point.  All of the alternative timeline stuff you
are proposing makes for an interesting TML discussion, and might even be
a good idea for _a_ sourcebook.  But when you start talking about a
_series_ of sourcebooks, the fact that SJG is behind it (no small time
player), and the rather shaky start IG got off to (everything else that
needs said here has been said), there is cause to be concerned.

   You also seem to have an attitude that "you'd better off tossing all
that Rebellion and Virus crap and sticking with the regular Imperial
setting."  Not everyone shares your view.  Those who have chosen to use
settings further along the timeline do so because they think they are
superior.  I use a setting that is set 70-80 years ahead of yours, yet I
respect your decision to continue with what you are doing--why can't you
respect my decision?  Why don't you seem capable of understanding why it
is that people who use settings after 1116 would find the view that
"we'd be better off" offensive?

Regards,

Harold

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 7 Sep 97 17:12 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller

In-Reply-To: <199709052117.JAA25793@iconz.co.nz>

Rupert,

> I'm not sure I like the mostality rate GURPS seems to encourage, or 
> the way the more powerful characters all seem to start out as 
> escapees from an asylum.

Sounds *exactly* like Traveller to me...
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 7 Sep 1997 13:12:00 -0400 (EDT)
From: Larry Hadley <lhadley@peterboro.net>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1763

> Subject: Re: Sanity,Boredom and homicidal insanity

On Sat, 30 Aug 1997, shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) wrote:
> 
> I'm an *old* fan of the Hokas. :-)
> 
> Actually, what I've always wanted to do was put Mesklin in the
> Traveller universe. Picture fighter pilots who take about 1/16th the
> space a human takes, and consider 200g to be "comfortable". Sure,
> drives to get anywhere *near* that acceleration are hideously
> expensive. But it'd be worth the cost in the first fight. 
> 
> And picture the look on the faces of the players.... :-)

   Hmm, TL20 antimatter powerplants with reactionless thrusters. One nice
side-effect is that you can siphon off power for the energy weapons from
the drive powerplant and "only" lose a few Gs. ;)

   (It's all a plot of Grandfather, who gene-geneered the
proto-mesklinites as the "ultimate" fighter pilots).

=:->


- -- DLH                                 lhadley@peterboro.net

http://text.peterboro.net/~lhadley/Profile.html

  "Fight to fly, fly to fight, fight to win." - TOPGUN motto.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 7 Sep 1997 09:06:08 +0800
From: kenji@accessone.com (Kenji Schwarz)
Subject: Re: Plague of Technovamps

Phillip McGregor writes:

[mega snip]

>Sure, and the Vilani had had Terran POWs for hundreds of years.

_V&V_ mentions that the Vilani don't generally take prisoners; being
efficiency-minded as they are, their attitude is that dealing with enemy
captives (especially wounded ones) squanders valuable resources.

And Roderick Darroch Elliott writes:

['nother big snip]

>        It'd be fun, actually; the whole WoD gothgloomangsting thing can
>get kinda old on you, and right now I'm in a serious gearhead mankind
>overcoming hostile environments with high tech sorta mood...  at a
>sufficiently high TL, dealing with vampire infestations shouldn't be a
>problem :).

Perhaps our Superheros in Shades would be "invisible" to all those cool
high-tech sensors on battledress et al.?  Infrared scopes, presumably,
wouldn't show a thing.  Now, spooked Imperial Marines in Famille Spofulam
battledress toting FGMPs of the same manufacture, trying to fight
undetectable hyperkinetic angst-ridden parasites, there's a scenario...

What's up with this list?  I go away for a week or two, come back in order
to post a continuation of the writeup of everyone's favorite triggerhappy
mutant Commie lesbian minor race, and find the list full of GURPS
squabbles, epidemiology debates, CSC Yugos, and huggable Cthulhus.  What
drugs are you people ON?

</compliment off>

Kenji Schwarz
kenji@accessone.com

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1789
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Monday, September 8 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1790



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Battle dress turtles
Re: Battle dress turtles  (was RE: Traveller-digest V1997 #1764)
Re: Battle dress turtles  (was RE: Traveller-digest V1997  #1764
Re: Tech Levels
Re: CSC vehicles and putting them in an FTP
Re: GrrrrrrrrPS
re: Margaret and slavery???
re:Traveller: The Technogeeking
101 Books
Re:Jump in Traveller
Re: GURPS Traveller announced....
Re: Tech Levels
GURPS Traveller
Re: CT, Mega, TNE, T4, and then GURPS
Re: The Gateway Book - Replies to Various Comments (LONG)
New Traveller Tool
Re: Battle dress turtles  (was RE: Traveller-digest V1997  #1764
none
re: Thoughts on roleplaying
[TML] Milieu 0 Campaign [Long]

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 7 Sep 1997 16:17:24 -0500 (CDT)
From: jatkins6@ix.netcom.com (John Atkinson)
Subject: Re: Battle dress turtles

You wrote: 

>I didn't think the goal of an assault force was to win "hearts and minds",
>that's for management.
>
>Also, battle pods have retractible manipulative waldos.

But more importantly, you have to take the Red October Tank Factory (or 
other industrial complex complete with office buildings, assembly 
lines, warehouses, and so forth).  Inside is a Soviet rifle division 
(or anyone else with significant numbers of light anti-armor weapons).  
You don't want to just drop a tacnuke on it.  You have nothing but 
battlepods.  You loose.  

Battle pods are essentially ultra-light vehicles with all the attendant 
advantages and disadvantages.


John M. Atkinson

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 7 Sep 1997 16:13:00 -0500 (CDT)
From: jatkins6@ix.netcom.com (John Atkinson)
Subject: Re: Battle dress turtles  (was RE: Traveller-digest V1997 #1764)

You wrote: 

>> Hoo-rah!  Yes, it's much easier to go for the Medal of Honor when the only
>> consequence of blowing it is that annoting keening hit whistle...
>
>On the other hand, in "real life", you *really* want to get rid of the
>tanks before they get rid of you...

Anyone not in a bullet-magnet (aka vehicle) can hide from any tank. . . 
it takes much more balls to attack the damn thing.

>One *big* advantage of tracks over grav is that I'm pretty certain that
>a powered up grav vehicle stands out like a sore thumb on gravitic
>sensors (say an advanced mass detector). 

However, sensitive enough TL-whatever seismic and audio sensors will 
pick up a treaded vehicle.  And it's all irrelevant to anyone with 
orbital superiority--sattelites with imaging radar and IR sensing will 
pick up any vehicle any time.

John M. Atkinson

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 7 Sep 1997 16:29:10 -0500 (CDT)
From: jatkins6@ix.netcom.com (John Atkinson)
Subject: Re: Battle dress turtles  (was RE: Traveller-digest V1997  #1764

You wrote: 

>Question:  *must* fusion power plants operate at *full* power all the
>time or can they be run at just the right setting to provide the
>amount of power required (thereby reducing it's heat signature)?  Or
>does the simple fact that we are dealing with superheated plasma make
>this a moot point? :)

If one is moving, with heplar, then one is venting plasma, and will 
show up on IR like a neon sign.  Ditto for Image intensifiers or so 
forth, I presume (what does plasma look like?  I've never seen it IRL, 
just in bad SF movies).

Now, if we're doing reactionless thruster plates. . . 

But I could imagine a grav tank going into 'stealth mode', settling 
down in a scrape, shutting down the heplar, throttling back the fusion 
plant to minimum, and executing an armor ambush.

John M. Atkinson

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 07 Sep 1997 17:33:18 -0500
From: Alex Ingram <ingram@airmail.net>
Subject: Re: Tech Levels

Richard Hough wrote:
> 
> >TECH LEVEL GROUPS
> >       TL Groups       Title
> >       -   0   NoTech=09
> >       1 -   3 VLoTech
> >       4 -   6 LoTech=09
> >       7 -   9 MidTech=09
> >       10 - 12 HiTech=09
> >       13 - 15 VHiTech
> >       16 - 18 UHiTech
> 
> I don't think these titles are meaningful or useful. They are only remotely
> accurate around Sylea in M:0. They would be completely wrong in a campaign
> in a different setting or milieu. Even in M:0 they don't describe what the
> technolgy or society can do. If I heard that a planet was "HiTech" I would
> have to look up TL 11 or whatever to see what it actually meant.
> 
> I think the tech level titles should be somewhat descriptive, perhaps the
> scale of civilization or industry the tech can sustain. How about these:
> 
> TECH LEVEL GROUPS
>         TL      Title
>         0       Nomadic
>         1 - 3   Agrarian
>         4 - 6   Industrial
>         7 - 9   Planetary
>         10 - 12 Stellar
>         13 - 15 Nucleonic
>         16 - 18 Galactic
> 
> --
> Richard Hough
> rdhough@orca.bc.ca

I know I like this system better. But please explain nucleonic?

Alex Ingram

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 7 Sep 1997 21:57:14 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: CSC vehicles and putting them in an FTP

Simon Early wrote:


>Rob's CSC program sounds like a good reason to get a Mac!

Metator (also by Rob) is an even better reason.

Dom


- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"Omnia Mutantur Nihil Interit"  -  Sandman 'The Wake'
"Everything Changes, but nothing is truly lost" 

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 7 Sep 1997 23:52:18 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: GrrrrrrrrPS

Doug wrote:

>No, the real Nightmare would be if White Wolf got a hold of Traveller..
>
>"I'm Clan Merchant, and I'm having angst over my loss of cargo..."

The Tremere Consulate?

The Brujah Confederation?

Quickly spends Willpower to resist these horrible thoughts <g>

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"Omnia Mutantur Nihil Interit"  -  Sandman 'The Wake'
"Everything Changes, but nothing is truly lost" 

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 00:02:44 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: re: Margaret and slavery???

Dave Biggs wrote:

>At 11:24 PM 9/5/97 -0400, you wrote:
>
>>surprises: Margaret and slavery (she at first appeared to be the one to
>>restore the Imperium, she turned out to be quite scummy), the true nature
>
>Now I missed that one.  I thought I had all the official history type books,
>where did the truth about Margaret come from?  Could you tell me what book?

Hard Times' background (possibly the best ever Traveller Supplement),
specifically the folio adventure Arrival Vengeance where the players get to
rescue a ship carrying indentured workers out of the Wilds to Margaret's
realm. Economic slavery.

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"Omnia Mutantur Nihil Interit"  -  Sandman 'The Wake'
"Everything Changes, but nothing is truly lost" 

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 7 Sep 1997 23:58:59 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: re:Traveller: The Technogeeking

Roderick Darroch Elliott wrote:
>
>>
>>>At last, Harold said:
>>>>   No, no the *real* nightmare scenario would be Wizards of the
>>>>Coast....  :-0
>>>
>>>Yeah, they'd fire all of the designers right before Christmas.
>>
>>No, the real Nightmare would be if White Wolf got a hold of Traveller..
>>
>>"I'm Clan Merchant, and I'm having angst over my loss of cargo..."
>>- --
>
>	Strangely enough, I can't shake the idea of a Vampire/Traveller
>crossover campaign.  After having played in several of Ross's Vampire
>campaigns (that's where the SAN loss came from), I can think of nothing
>more comforting to have in the World of Darkness than BD-14 and a FGMP:
>"Stakes?  We don't need no stinking TL-0 pointy sticks!  Dominate _THIS_,
>bloodsucker! [SFX: FGMP discharge, followed by vapourizing vampire
>noises]".  Or any number of the other Trav Really Big Guns(tm) or Funky
>High-Tech Widgets(tm).

Hmm. I'd get hold of 'Night's Edge', the Alternative Reality Sourcebook for
Cyberpunk and use the Radiation effects on Vampires rules from that to make
some very interesting new limits! (Vampires in Cyberpunk = Very, very
scared and freaked out players!)

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"Omnia Mutantur Nihil Interit"  -  Sandman 'The Wake'
"Everything Changes, but nothing is truly lost" 

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 7 Sep 1997 21:55:24 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: 101 Books

Andy Lilly wrote:

>P.S. 101 Rendezvous and 101 Travellers are out. 101 Lifeforms will be out
>soon. All hand-published by BITS, so I get to check what they look like at
>every stage in the process. All 101 books come with loads of useful
>Traveller material for people that referee or play Traveller and enjoy the
>game. Also guaranteed to have at least one deliberate piece of errata in
>every book to satisfy those people that just like picking holes in things,
>rather than doing anything constructive towards promoting Traveller.


The two books are excellent - Travellers gives a selection of passengers
with motives and plot ideas, ideal for a merchant campaign {best for CT/MT
and T4}. Rendezvous gives loads of useful places to visit including 'The
Long Way Home' Bar (;-) ) and a certain fencing club that players in the
second tournament at EGC may recognise! ;-)

Both are similar to 76 patrons in style - all I can do is recommend them
wholeheartedly, based on the use I anticipate to get from them in my
campaign.

Dom

NB I am biased as I spent 4 days at EGC trying to sell them...

PPS When 101 Lifeforms comes out, don't even think of analysing them from a
correct biological perspective, it'll save a lot of hassle....

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"Omnia Mutantur Nihil Interit"  -  Sandman 'The Wake'
"Everything Changes, but nothing is truly lost" 

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 7 Sep 1997 23:36:15 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re:Jump in Traveller

Some comments on how things work in my campaign....

Marc wrote:

>To plot a Standing Jump
>Edu + Astrogation < Easy (1D)

To successfully engage jump drive sequence in a standing jump
Edu+ Engineering <Easy (1D)


>To plot a Running Jump
>Edu + Astrogation < Difficult (2.5D)

To successfully engage jump drive sequence in a running jump
Edu+ Engineering <Difficult (2.5D)

Mishaps as Astrogation - the key problem for the engineer is engaging the
hull grid in correct sequence, and managing the hydrogen release and power
engagement...

Jump Transition:

One of the most impressive sights in any spacefaring culture is of a
starship entering and exiting jump. An observer would see a blue-white
glowing grid appearing rapidly over the ships hull, combined with the slow
release of hydrogen gas around the hull to create the normal space jump
bubble. The lanthanum hull grid gradually becomes brighter until the
details of the ship become indistinct. As this happens, the ship may tumble
in a controlled manner to enter jump in the correct attitude. As the jump
transition occurs ship becomes too bright to look at, and disappears in
blue/white burst of energy, which collapses in on itself like the lines on
a television screen when it is switched off. Observation of a jump
transition will often leave a momentary burned image in the observers'
vision. Exit from jump is a reversal of this process...

On board the ship, passengers and crew will notice very little change aside
from a momentary feeling of nausea during transition from and to normal
space. There are a number of reports that suggest that some humans may be
unable to stand such transitions, and may end up violently sick, disturbed,
or even dead! Fortunately, this is a very rare occurance. Vilani-crewed
ships often dim their lights and shut down unnecessary systems in respect
of the difficulties that their forefathers encountered in obtaining
sufficient power to enter jump safely.

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"Omnia Mutantur Nihil Interit"  -  Sandman 'The Wake'
"Everything Changes, but nothing is truly lost" 

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 7 Sep 1997 15:59:20 -0700
From: Scott Ellsworth <Scott_Ellsworth@alumni.hmc.edu>
Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller announced....

>Evyn MacDude writes:
>>Joseph Chepe Lockett wrote:
>>> This is of obvious interest to me and the other small GURPS cabal here on
>>> TML.  I'm not sure how I feel about the alternate timeline deal, but it
>>> should be interesting.  And maybe SJG can show IG a thing or two about
>>> product proofing and presentation....
>>
>>Cool tides Dudes, Now maybe will see it done right.
>>With alternate time lines, maybe we can see TNE finished out.
>

>   Look, gloat if you must, but this doesn't mean anything any better
>than when IG took over the publishing rights.  Besides setting up the
>*mother* of all TML wars as the GURPS Traveller people and their CT
>allies fight it out with MTers, TNEers, and an assortment of canonists,
>you have the whole issue of GURPS Traveller and Marc Miller's Traveller
>fighting it out for shelf space at a game store near you.  Oh sure, I
>know what some have said about the two lines complimenting each other,
>but that's just plain rubbish.  Unless SJG plans an extremely limited
>run of Traveller materials (say a couple or three sourcebooks), in the
>end you'll have GURPS Traveller or nothing.

I must diagree.  I have been in a number of FLGS lately, and they have all
said that while T4 has enough stuff coming out, the reaction to it is so
negative that they are not going to stock it unless there is greater
interest.  When I mentioend GURPS Traveller, they said that they trusted
SJG to ship something that would sell, and that they might consider filling
out the IG selection when it hits, just to have more product to sell.

These are stores that used to stock Traveller, but they had enough
customers trying to return Starships and First Survey that they felt the
game did not have enough quality or enough demand.

IG has shown that they are incapable of maintaining a 1 supplement per
month rate without crippling typos, a lack of proofreading, and a complete
disregard of editorial quality.  Editorial quality is that produced by
editors, proofers, and galley slaves, not internal content quality.

We might all wish that it were otherwise, and we might all hope that the
authors we know who have done good work might be able to find a better
venue, but the fact remains, that there is no other real outlet in the
states.

If SJG can get product on the shelf, and get it sold, the gaming stores I
talked to might consider T4 a product worth carrying.  Your FLGS might say
something different, but I know that several here will not order anything
unless asked to, and they have said that they just do not trust the quality
and salability of what comes out of IG.  One also said that they took a
look inside FF&S when it came in as a custoemr special order, and did not
see great signs that IG is changing.  They did feel ok about the rate
products came in, but were unable to understand why IG was so comitted to
shipping things before they were quite done.

The choice is not bewteen T4 and GT, butfor these stores ebtween _any_
traveller and none.  If they order GT, they will consider T4 as well, in
hopes of making package sales.

Scott

- -------
Scott_Ellsworth@alumni.hmc.edu.  http://users.deltanet.com/~fuz/
"You die, she dies, EVERYbody dies" - Heavy Metal
"When a great many people are unable to find work, unemployment results" -
Calvin Coolidge, attrib. by Stanley Walker, City Editor, p. 131 (1934)

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 7 Sep 1997 18:49:51 +0800
From: kenji@accessone.com (Kenji Schwarz)
Subject: Re: Tech Levels

Richard Hough writes:

>I think the tech level titles should be somewhat descriptive, perhaps the
>scale of civilization or industry the tech can sustain. How about these:
>
>TECH LEVEL GROUPS
>        TL      Title
>        0       Nomadic
>        1 - 3   Agrarian
>        4 - 6   Industrial
>        7 - 9   Planetary
>        10 - 12 Stellar
>        13 - 15 Nucleonic
>        16 - 18 Galactic

What's "nucleonic" mean, dude?

There are, at least on Terra, TL-0 agrarian societies, as well as TL1+
nomadic ones.  The lower end of the TL scale has always been a little
over-simplified for my taste.

Kenji Schwarz
kenji@accessone.com

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 12:36:11 +1000 (EST)
From: "D.Moodie" <dmoodie@st.nepean.uws.edu.au>
Subject: GURPS Traveller

> GURPS Traveller

While I think that GURPS (a poor destitute cousin of the Traveller
system(s))is a power-gamers paradise, has too much of a tech-focus to
be 'generic' and has a mind-numbing combat system (yes I do play TNE); I
can only see G-Traveller as being a 'good thing' after IG's incompetent
attempts at T4. A game system with such a large user base can only serve
to introduce more players to the Traveller universe. When I saw T4 for the
first time I though 'no way is this going to sell' mainly because a large
portion of the game buying population out here are 'wierd-backround' 
freaks and would bore easily when presented with a more generic hard-SF
style game. I believe GDW saw this and that's why they made the Virus
concept and the RCES (they do bear a passing resemblance to Shadowrun
missions yes?). Sure the way Virus was implemented sucked in many ways,
but if my players will be happier playing with a larger-than-life enemy
then I'll quite happily suspend disbelief and think up a heap of 'wierd'
missions based around the quirks of Virus (Remember: a GM's job is not to
have a fun time running a game, but have a frustrating time keeping the
players in check ;)).
	Getting back onto GURPS; I do hate GURPS but if Traveller didn't
exists then it would be my next choice for an SF game system - of course
I'd have to bastardize it a bit. Actually one of my gaming pals is a minor
GURPS fan (well, his opinion reduced after we bagged the hell out of
GURPS :)) who is dying to run an SF campaign. I waved MT, then TNE in
front of him and mentioned the fact that there are some home-brew GURPS
Traveller rules on the 'net and he became rather interested. 
	I hope that GURPS Traveller will give both T4 and GURPS some focus
and some error-free books too (Though GURPS is not free from errors, take
a look at all the errata on the SJG website) and I will most certainly
take a good look at any GURPS Traveller stuff that turns up in my local
store (Late at night when no-one else is around of course...). 

							D.Moodie

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 7 Sep 1997 21:37:21 -0500
From: "Andrew Akins" <igor@ames.net>
Subject: Re: CT, Mega, TNE, T4, and then GURPS

Harold Hale writes:

>   You also seem to have an attitude that "you'd better off tossing all
>that Rebellion and Virus crap and sticking with the regular Imperial
>setting."  Not everyone shares your view.  Those who have chosen to use
>settings further along the timeline do so because they think they are
>superior.  I use a setting that is set 70-80 years ahead of yours, yet I
>respect your decision to continue with what you are doing--why can't you
>respect my decision?  Why don't you seem capable of understanding why it
>is that people who use settings after 1116 would find the view that
>"we'd be better off" offensive?

Hear hear.

You know, there is very little material or ideas on TML that offend me. But
the manner in which some people state their opinions - that is another
matter entirely. There is a "culture of rudeness" that abounds, where people
say things without thinking about how it might offend others.

I play in the Rebellion setting. I personally detest TNE - I like thruster
plates, I don't like the Virus, and some of the imagery of TNE doesn't fit
my vision of Traveller. FF&S is too detailed and complicated for me.

So what?

Harold likes TNE, for his reasons. I respect them. I would never insinuate
that TNE is substandard, wrong, or stupid - because it isn't. The TNE stuff
is well written. Gritty. Much more "realistic" than MT or CT. Well detailed.
FF&S is a gearhead's (and I mean that as a complement) dream. Fine work
(Side note - Harold's own work for this "Children of Earth" material is
fabulous - I use his Vegan write-up in my own campaign...).

Why is it that people cannot state their opinions without insulting the
opinions of others?

I'm happy about the GURPS licence. Personally, I think it'll be good for the
game - the Rebellion is essentially dead since MT is dead (sure IG might get
around to it, but I'm not holding my breath). I'll probably buy some of the
GURPS stuff (cause I ALWAYS buy Traveller stuff - I own all the TNE books
even if I don't play in that setting), but I doubt I'll use it much.

Lets just try to be nicer to each other - the bottom line is we ALL are fans
of Traveller, in one form or another...

<Sorry for the lecture :) >


+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Andrew Akins                                                       |
| Home: igor@ames.net - http://www.ames.net/igor/                    |
| Work: andya@cms-gt.com - http://www.cms-gt.com/                    |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
| May your villages remain ignorant of tax collectors, and may your  |
| sons be many and ugly and strong and willing workers, and may your |
| daughters be few and beautiful and excellent providers of love     |
| gifts from eminent families that live very far away, and may your  |
| lives be blessed by the beauty that has touched mine.              |
|                    - Number Ten Ox, "Bridge of Birds"              |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 7 Sep 97 20:11 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: The Gateway Book - Replies to Various Comments (LONG)

In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19970903180451.00909204@47.125.128.13>

Andy,

> >I mean, didn't *ANYBODY* even bother to *check* the proof copies?
> >Or didn't they even bother to *DO* bloody proofs?
>  
> We authors hand over the manuscript and cross our fingers. We don't see any
> proofs, galleys, whatever. Naturally, it's a little costly for IG to fax
> them all over to me as I'm in the UK, and posting them would take too long,
> as these things are normally done to a tight deadline. However, given that

FedEx could have a copy in your hands the next day, for less than the cost of 
a copy of the finished product. Considering the bad publicity and lost sales 
caused by these cock-ups, I'd call that a bargain.
______________________________________________________________________
Andrew M J Boulton                        http://www.cix.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 7 Sep 1997 22:00:31 -0500
From: "Andrew Akins" <igor@ames.net>
Subject: New Traveller Tool

 Announcing: New version of ssdsxl97.xls, my Excel97 workbook for designing
ships using SSDS. New additions include backup systems and some bug fixes.

You can find the file ssdsxl.zip on my web site. Just go to:

http://www.ames.net/igor/trav/trav.htm

And then go to the "Drydock" section.

LEt me know what you think!

+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Andrew Akins                                                       |
| Home: igor@ames.net - http://www.ames.net/igor/                    |
| Work: andya@cms-gt.com - http://www.cms-gt.com/                    |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
| May your villages remain ignorant of tax collectors, and may your  |
| sons be many and ugly and strong and willing workers, and may your |
| daughters be few and beautiful and excellent providers of love     |
| gifts from eminent families that live very far away, and may your  |
| lives be blessed by the beauty that has touched mine.              |
|                    - Number Ten Ox, "Bridge of Birds"              |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 7 Sep 1997 18:02:27 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Battle dress turtles  (was RE: Traveller-digest V1997  #1764

In mail you write:

> You wrote: 
>
>>Question:  *must* fusion power plants operate at *full* power all the
>>time or can they be run at just the right setting to provide the
>>amount of power required (thereby reducing it's heat signature)?  Or
>>does the simple fact that we are dealing with superheated plasma make
>>this a moot point? :)
>
> If one is moving, with heplar, then one is venting plasma, and will 
> show up on IR like a neon sign.  Ditto for Image intensifiers or so 
> forth, I presume (what does plasma look like?  I've never seen it IRL, 
> just in bad SF movies).

Sure you have! Ever see a neon bulb (*not* a fluorescent tube, which
the Brits mis-call "neon"). That glowing gas is a plasma. The glow
comes from the photons emitted as electrons recombine with the ionized
atoms. 

For that matter, the light from lightning is from ionized air (another
plasma).

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 7 Sep 1997 23:37:41 -0400 (EDT)
From: GDWGAMES@aol.com
Subject: none

"MJ Dougherty:

> Can anyone on the digest tell me where Dave Nilsen went after GDW vanished?

Kentucky.

Kenji Schwarz:

> What's up with this list?  I go away for a week or two, come back in order
> to post a continuation of the writeup of everyone's favorite triggerhappy
> mutant Commie lesbian minor race, and find the list full of GURPS
> squabbles, epidemiology debates, CSC Yugos, and huggable Cthulhus.  What
> drugs are you people ON?

Kentucky?

Ooops, sorry, that's the answer to the last question   : )

Hmmm... I've always thought some of them were wearing their underwear too
tight, but that diesn't explain everything. : )

Although I do find the notion of the black unicorn with red eyes very
compelling. : )

Loren Wiseman

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 7 Sep 1997 20:39:48 -0800
From: Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca>
Subject: re: Thoughts on roleplaying

> I'm also not sure how long the hobby will last in the face of rapidly
> expanding and increasing in complexity multiplayer online games.
> Sometimes, when my players really start getting annoying, I'm tempted
> to either go to PBeM or give up and play Diablo instead.  ;-(  Less
> overhead, until we get campaign/adventure creators for online, real
> time roleplaying.  It's coming...  If only I can determine a feasible
> economic model for it, and pitch it to investors.

Online games and PBeM have some advantages, but take it from someone who
was involved in not one but two abortive attempts at graphicl MUDs, they
won't replace roleplaying. For starters, online games don't have the social
interaction and feedback among players and GM. A good group of players can
make the game a riot even if there's no planned adventure. The online games
are either pre-scripted, or have such limited interation that they can't
accurately be described as "role-playing". Online players seem to have an
incredible short attention span... they want to be the king of carnage NOW!
I have found PBeM even worse, there are no graphics and the pace is so slow
it can take months to complete a single encounter.

Online games have potential; for example it's lots easier to arrange
sessions, it's easy to record events, and the graphics are getting pretty
good. But they won't replace RPGs in the forseeable future.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 07 Sep 1997 23:38:07 -0400
From: Bill Rutherford <worj@topgun.cinecom.com>
Subject: [TML] Milieu 0 Campaign [Long]

I just stopped by my NSFLGS and picked up the new hardbound Milieu 0
Campaign.  Haven't read it cover-to-cover yet, but a couple of things jump
out immediately...

1.  When IG said M0 and FS would be combined into one book, they meant just
that.  Pp 1 - 144 constitute M0.  Then the page numbers then start over
again and pp 1 - 109 constitute FS.  There is no common table of contents
or other indicator to get one to the FS part of the book. The same JTAS
advert even appears at the end of each section!

2.  Government Type and Law Level, as expected, remain identical to one
another in FS.

3.  FS still separates into player and referee data sections, complete with
incomplete data in the player sections...

4.  M0's table of contents lists 8 chapters, covering the first 110 pages
of the original M0. 

If you go to page 113 of M0, you will discover chapter 9, Timeline and
Significant Events, which is actually quite interesting (at least to a
neophyte like me who isn't yet well enough versed to see the canonical
inaccuracies, if any!).  It runs 12 pages and includes two pages of charts,
by sector, for M0 (0 - 200), showing the percentage of systems in each
sector integrated, still independent, contacted, and not contacted, in 10
year increments.  The first two and the last two, as you might guess, are
each a pair of complements - 20% integrated suggests 80% independent, etc.
The charts seem useful to me to give an idea of the "flavor" of each
sector, and how quickly each came into the Imperial fold... 

Pp 125 - 127 contain chapter 10, Rivals of the Young Third Imperium, and
details (to the same extent, more or less, that the Chanestin Kingdom and
the Interstellar Confederacy were, in chapter 1), four new rivals to the
Imperium, providing short history, culture, demographics and diplomatic notes.

Pp 128 - 138 contain chapter 11, Adventures in Milieu 0, and details
several patrons and an adventure (Patient Zero).

Pp 139 - 144 contain chapter 12, Worlds in Miliew 0, and provides
explanatory notes on making sense of the UWP and fleshing a UWP out into a
world description.

These, then, chapters 9 - 12 (pp 113 - 144), are the 32 additional promised
pages, well hidden in the middle of the book.

As I said, I've not reread the original pages from M0 yet, but a spot check
of 20 pages shows identical text passages at identical points on the pages,
which suggests they're unchanged...

As soon as somebody's had a chance to read the M0 Campaign cover-to-cover,
I'd love to hear whether there were ANY changes therein!



Bill Rutherford
worj@topgun.cinecom.com

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1790
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Monday, September 8 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1791



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Mining, core and ice
Re: Mining, core and ice
Re: Thoughts on roleplaying
Re: [TML] Milieu 0 Campaign [Long]
Re: CT, Mega, TNE, T4, and then GURPS
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1789
Re: Jump in Traveller
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1789
Re: Jump in Traveller
RE: Traveller-digest V1997 #1789
FF&S2 laser small arms question
Re: Traveller: The Technogeeking
RE: France in 2300AD (was Traveller-digest V1997 #1789)
re: Thoughts on roleplaying
Re: Battle dress turtles  (was RE: Traveller-digest V1997  #1764
Re: Tech Levels

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 08:02:45 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Tommy Grav <tommy.grav@astro.uio.no>
Subject: Re: Mining, core and ice

On Sat, 6 Sep 1997, Douglas E. Berry wrote:

> I hope you meant 7.864g/cm..  This is very dense, so you'd probably find a
> great deal of heavy metals, radioactives, and rare earths (lanthanum strike!)

Yes I did. Forgot that **** litle dot. Darn :-)

> 
> The core might be molten, dependeding upon the age of the world.  If it's
> much older than about 3-4 billion years, the core has probably cooled.  An
> interesting anomoly would be an older world with a high percentage of
> radioactives and a still molten core.

Any explaination for this anomaly. Are you thinking of a captured planet?
If not any other reasons for this type of planet to show up around a star
like this? 
> +-------------------------------------------------+
> |   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
> |          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
> |          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
> +-------------------------------------------------+
> 

Tommy Grav                  tommy.grav@astro.uio.no    
Institute of Astrophysics   http://www.uio.no/~tommygr/
University in Oslo          "If you value your lives, be somwhere 
Norway                       else!" - Ambassador Delenn B5 

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 07:58:40 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Tommy Grav <tommy.grav@astro.uio.no>
Subject: Re: Mining, core and ice

On Fri, 5 Sep 1997, Craig Berry wrote:

> > What type of minerals would be feasible to mine on a cold rock planet
> > orbiting a M3 main sequence star? Because of the low temperature I
> > envision a small community (20,000+) working underground in caves mining
> > something, but what? I also need it to be profitable to sent to a TL12 
> > heavly populated world two parsec away. Any ideas?
> 
> Traveller has always played rather loosely with this, but in my mind only
> a very few types of 'raw material', or even primary-processed bulk
> material, would pay for the cost of transporting them out of system.  The
> sad fact is that, once you're free to go after asteroids, other worlds,
> comets, mainworld resources, and so forth in any one system, there's very
> little you won't have.  Nature spreads most ores around pretty evenly.

I don't use the standard jump rules, my jumps are much shorter, so
economics are somewhat different. I was most interestin what type of
metals, valuables etc. that might be on this planet that made the
corporation start mining there.

> So, for 'nearly-raw material' export, you need something unique to that
> system, or nearly so.  Organics are good in this regard (specialty foods
> or cloth, for example), but that doesn't apply to your world.  Highly
> valuable and relatively uncommon minerals or the elements derived from
> them are also believable; lanthanum is the most commonly used example in
> Traveller.  Finally, high-quality gemstones might be a truly valuable
> export product, if present in high concentrations.  This would also expain
> why your mining operation is in caves rather than strip-mining from the
> surface; getting intact gemstones is a much more delicate business than
> bulk-extracting lanthanum ore.

I like the gemstone approach, I might go with that. Would there be a
higher density of for example diamonds deep inside a planet with a solid
core? What other minerals would there be for the company to make a profit
on?

 > 
> > Some background perhaps. The system has no gas giants, only one rock
> > orbiting about 0.5AU out. The planet has a rotational periode around its
> > axis of 300 sederial years at a 5 degrees tilt from the ecliptic plane.
> > The planet is over 3000km in radius and with a density of 7864 grams per
> > cubic cm. Would this mean that the core would have to be molten or could
> > it be solid?
> 
> I don't get that rotation figure.  Off the top of my head, such a world's
> year would be roughly 200 days long or thereabouts -- certainly between
> 100 and 300, unless my brain's especially dead tonight.  Read at face
> value, your statement above seems to indicate that the world is almost
> motionless with respect to the *stars* -- in other words, rotating
> "backward" (effectively) with respect to its primary.  This is certainly
> possible -- Venus does qualitatively the same thing, though far less
> extremely so -- but if you mean something else, please explain what you
> were after here.
> 

It wasn't a rotational figure around the sun, but its selfrotation around
its axis. Therefor its day would be 300 siderial years, while its year is
as you state around 200 days. I can't find anything on laws for the
rotation of planets around their own axis so I simple choose a value.
Comments on this would be appriciated.

> > Its hydrosphere rating is 0, but with a mean temperature of -217 degrees
> > Celcius, no atmosphere, is there a possibility that there are some frozen
> > ice of any kind on the surface?
> 
> Are you sure that surface temp is right?  0.5 AU from an M3 V, I'd expect
> more like -150 C.  Your version is only 56 K!

According to my text book, the formula for the temperature at various
distances from the star is given by

      T = Tstar ((1-A)/2)^(1/4) (Rstar/r)^(1/4)

where Tstar is the temp of the star, Rstar is the stars radius, A is the
planets albedo and r is the planets distance from the star.

Here we have r=0.5AU, Tstar=3500K, Rstar=0.5 sunradiuses and A=0.04 

      T = 3500K * 0.83 * 0.06819 = 198K

Which is around your suggestion, the 56K value was derived using the
Alien Planet Generator that I found on the net. Thanks for pointing that
out to me.

> 
> In any case, I can't imagine a world at either temp not having at least a
> moderate coating of ices.
> 

I would agree.

> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>    |   Craig Berry - cberry@cinenet.net
>  --*--    Home Page: http://www.cinenet.net/users/cberry/home.html
>    |      Member of The HTML Writers Guild: http://www.hwg.org/   
>        "Every man and every woman is a star."
> 
> 

Tommy Grav                  tommy.grav@astro.uio.no    
Institute of Astrophysics   http://www.uio.no/~tommygr/
University in Oslo          "If you value your lives, be somwhere 
Norway                       else!" - Ambassador Delenn B5 

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 16:16:16 +1000 (EST)
From: "D.Moodie" <dmoodie@st.nepean.uws.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Thoughts on roleplaying

You'd consider playing Diablo? Are you SICK?!?! 

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 08 Sep 1997 00:59:00 +0000
From: Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: [TML] Milieu 0 Campaign [Long]

Bill Rutherford wrote:

> 1.  When IG said M0 and FS would be combined into one book, they meant just
> that.  Pp 1 - 144 constitute M0.  Then the page numbers then start over
> again and pp 1 - 109 constitute FS.  There is no common table of contents
> or other indicator to get one to the FS part of the book. The same JTAS
> advert even appears at the end of each section!
> 
> 2.  Government Type and Law Level, as expected, remain identical to one
> another in FS.

Pathetic.  This will be the first T4 item that I will not buy.



> If you go to page 113 of M0, you will discover chapter 9, Timeline and
> Significant Events, which is actually quite interesting (at least to a
> neophyte like me who isn't yet well enough versed to see the canonical
> inaccuracies, if any!).  It runs 12 pages and includes two pages of charts,
> by sector, for M0 (0 - 200), showing the percentage of systems in each
> sector integrated, still independent, contacted, and not contacted, in 10
> year increments.  

Interesting.  I'd like to see it, but it is not worth the price of the
book if you already own M0 and FS seperately.



> Pp 125 - 127 contain chapter 10, Rivals of the Young Third Imperium, and
> details (to the same extent, more or less, that the Chanestin Kingdom and
> the Interstellar Confederacy were, in chapter 1), four new rivals to the
> Imperium, providing short history, culture, demographics and diplomatic notes.

Cool.


> Pp 139 - 144 contain chapter 12, Worlds in Miliew 0, and provides
> explanatory notes on making sense of the UWP and fleshing a UWP out into a
> world description.

OK, I'm curious.  How did they explain away the LL=GG flub?



Kenneth.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 7 Sep 1997 22:21:45 -0800
From: Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca>
Subject: Re: CT, Mega, TNE, T4, and then GURPS

>> I find it sad that the rebellion won't be used as a background.

I agree the Rebellion had potental as a campaign background. However, I see
no reason to assume it will be abandoned completely. Even if Strephon
doesn't get assassinated, the Rebellion couldn't have happened unless there
was already significant unrest in the Imperium. There's still a role for
Norris, Margaret, Dulinor, et al. Heck, I could even put up with an
appearance by Virus (as an annoying software malfunction that makes
Imperial transponders go offline).

In any case, there is already enough Rebellion-era material to run your own
campaign there. One advantage of GURPS is that it really is generic; make
some GURPS characters, pull out your copy of Hard Times, and go.

- --
Richard Hough
rdhough@orca.bc.ca

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 08 Sep 1997 07:12:24 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1789

On Sun, 7 Sep 1997 15:10:36 -0400, you wrote:

>Date: Sun, 07 Sep 1997 06:43:16 -0700
>From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
>Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1784
>
>At 05:30 PM 9/6/97 -0500, you wrote:
>>Quoth Phillip McGregor:
>>> But remember, SJG had a White Wolf license -- until White Wolf pulled it
>for
>>> no better reason than the SJG products were superior (better proofreading,
>>> graphics, playtesting etc.) and they were evidently worried (perhaps with
>>> no real reason -- I don't have any figures, obviously!) that there were
>>> (or would soon be) losing sales *themselves* as people bought the superior
>>> SJG products.

>Oh, yeah.... that was a good one..
>
>I've heard form a friend who writes for White Wolf that the straw that
>broke the camels back came when WW was introducing Wraith at Gencon, and
>all the people came up, looked it over, and asked when the GURPS version
>would be released!

And there is a reasonable chance of this happening with T4. What happens when,
at Gencon 98 (or 99) someone walks up to the IG stand and does much the same?
Does IG (which, as we have been told, is really a wholly owned subsidiary of
Sweetpea, who have the Traveller License rights) simply say ... "Oh, that's
healthy, thats competition." or, much more likely, do they find some excuse
(*ANY* excuse) to simply pull the GURPS Traveller license?

After all, unless IG gets their act together -- something for which there is
absolutely no evidence they have a clue how to do -- their sales are going to
suffer even *without* competition. With the sort of rep that SJG have, I'd bet
on SJ outselling them from the start.

Now, fair enough, a lot of those sales wouldn't go to IG anyway -- mainly
because IG's rep is probably scaring away more customers than it attracts, so it
is really only selling to the die-hard techno-lovers who lust after FF&S/2 style
products rather than to newbies -- but SJG will sell to his established customer
base (large, as we have already discussed) *and* the newbies who will say
something along the lines of "Well, GURPS has a solid rep. SJG does good quality
and value for money products. I'll buy it!"

And one they're hooked to GURPS Traveller, I can't see much likelihood of
crossover sales to IG. After all, they have GURPS Vehicles which is better
proofread and at least as well playtested as FF&S2 for Vehicle and Vehicle
Weaponry Design. They have High Tech and Ultra Tech to mine for equipment, which
will replace CSC and EA. They have all sorts of ready to use backgrounds that
can easily be adapted for adventures and the like. No, I can't see many
crossover sales from the sort of buyers who buy GURPS Traveller over IG
Traveller at all.

Maybe I'm wrong. In any case, does it matter? So what if the much beloved (but
as has been significantly pointed out, much officially and deliberately
contradicted) by *some* "canon" for the Civil War and New Era are thrown out, if
GTrav dominates (as I am theorising it will), then *it* will *become* the new
Traveller "canon" in a way that TNE tried to but failed.

Anyway, that's my 2c worth.

Phil

- ---------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU)
Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)
Designer, Standard Role Playing (PGD)

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 00:06:04 -0700
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Jump in Traveller

Fri, 5 Sep 1997 18:36:00 -0400 (EDT), CardSharks@aol.com
>	The 100 Diameter Sphere. Jump uses a straight line in calculating
>course=
>s.
>If that straight line intersects a 100 diameter sphere around an object, =
>the
>ship is "precipitated out" of jump space. It is an astrogator=92s job to =
>plot a
>course which avoids these pitfalls (Notice that this prevents a ship from
>emerging from jump within another object).

There will be two main effects.  One is that you need to get to
100 diams to jump.  The second is when the stars of the origin
or destination systems are in the way (The odds of invervening
systems blocking are miniscule).  In game terms the first is
the old rule, the second will only have the effect that at
certain random times the players are going to need to travel
further out to jump.  Is this worth playing out?

>`	Standing Jump. Standard practice is for ships to do a standing jump
>(ju=
>mp
>with zero velocity); it=92s safer.
>	Running Jump. A ship could enter jump a high speed (called a
>running jum=
>p).
>Upon emerging, it need only decelerate as it approaches the new world. If
>poorly calculated, the ship is off course and will waste time maneuvering=
> to
>the world.

You will also want go in a direction where you are matching the differences
in speed betweent the origin and destination worlds.  Ships headed to the
same system will all tend to leave from the same spot.

>	A failure of Astrogation causes a misexit.

Becuase there happened to be a small object in the way.  Even if
totally screw up, the odds of this are long because space is mostly
empty.
>	Commercial Ship Astrogation. The course is plotted for a standing
>jump which
>will emerge at 100 diameters from the destination world.
>	Complex Astrogation. The course is plotted for a running jump which will
>emerge with the ship at full speed aimed at the destination world (and the
>ship then decelerates all the way to the destination world).
>
>To plot a Standing Jump
>Edu + Astrogation < Easy (1D)
>
>To plot a Running Jump
>Edu + Astrogation < Difficult (2.5D)

I don't think it's that diffucult a running jump.  You pretty
much just have to pick the other side to jump to.

____________________________
Summers@Alum.MIT.edu

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 08 Sep 1997 03:07:57 EDT
From: lugh1@juno.com
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1789

hello fellow travellers !
this is my first post to the list so bear with me .

A.  the solomani , this is the group that conquered the 1st Imp. and yet
they are treated as minor players in almost all printed CT, T4 expansions
.. I for one would like to see more on the solomani and more information
on adventuring in the solomani rim or the border of the solomani rim . I
think a book detailing the solomani and there lifestyle would be very
interesting .

B.  Aliens archive for T4 . this book was a major disappointment ! when I
shell out      $23.00 for a book I expect it to be something I can use .
when I saw aliens archive I was expecting the major races not a bunch of
silly minor races suitable only for a crappy ST episode . the tekundu ?
what a stupid alien , its a human with the water retention ability of a
camel ! Tim Brown I want what you were smoking when you came up with this
stuff .

C. 2300 AD , the back ground was alright if you like the idea of the
french rulings the world after twilight 2000 , of course when I buy or
play a game that is set on earth I expect some small degree of realism ,
Can any one name any ground war in europe that france didn't get raped in
? Basically 2300 irked me because I had a hard time thinking the united
states would ever fall behind canada france and africa in industry ,
military , or space tech. even with WW3, also why is the american arm so
limited while everything cool is on then french arm . do any of you
people really think this would happen ? . seems to me that the author was
going out of his way to break conventional thinking on the future . 

D. the 2300 system , it was a burden to play and combat was long and
complex , if I were not a math major I would have been lost . combat
should be quick and deadly
 [ CT , T4 ] and character gen should be as quick as possible . maybe
2300AD would be o.k. if it used the T4 system and cleaned up some of the
stupid background quirks 
the concept of the united states not being the world leader in the future
seems highly improbable .  IMHO ..   

Jim McKee
pro solomani

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 01:11:41 -0700
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Jump in Traveller

Mon, 08 Sep 1997 00:15:19 -0400, "Michael D. Peters" <Letterworks@Comten.com>
>I would also
>like to suggest that you concider adding a secction to your Jump rules
>concerning Jumps into unknown systems. I have always assumed that known
>systems have tables in the computer to calculate compensation factors
>between known systems. For entry into systems for which the ship has no
>table something along the lines of a Formidable Task should be used.

Well.  If you can detect planets from other systems you have no
problem.  Otherwise you simply jump into the habital zone and count
on fact that space is as close to empty "as makes no difference".


____________________________
Summers@Alum.MIT.edu

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 11:32:07 +0200
From: Pascal Saradjian <PascalS@alphamedia.fr>
Subject: RE: Traveller-digest V1997 #1789

Hello Travellers.

I am a French player.=20

In French, we play at many RPG with USA Hegemony. Why Not ?

In 2300 AD, the french have an important part in the background (and not =
"rulings the world"). Why Not ?

(Sorry for my bad english)

Pascal Saradjian

- -----Message d'origine-----
De:	lugh1@juno.com [SMTP:lugh1@juno.com]
Date:	lundi 8 septembre 1997 9:08
=C0:	traveller@MPGN.COM
Objet:	Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1789

hello fellow travellers !
this is my first post to the list so bear with me .

A.  the solomani , this is the group that conquered the 1st Imp. and yet
they are treated as minor players in almost all printed CT, T4 expansions
.. I for one would like to see more on the solomani and more information
on adventuring in the solomani rim or the border of the solomani rim . I
think a book detailing the solomani and there lifestyle would be very
interesting .

B.  Aliens archive for T4 . this book was a major disappointment ! when I
shell out      $23.00 for a book I expect it to be something I can use .
when I saw aliens archive I was expecting the major races not a bunch of
silly minor races suitable only for a crappy ST episode . the tekundu ?
what a stupid alien , its a human with the water retention ability of a
camel ! Tim Brown I want what you were smoking when you came up with this
stuff .

C. 2300 AD , the back ground was alright if you like the idea of the
french rulings the world after twilight 2000 , of course when I buy or
play a game that is set on earth I expect some small degree of realism ,
Can any one name any ground war in europe that france didn't get raped in
? Basically 2300 irked me because I had a hard time thinking the united
states would ever fall behind canada france and africa in industry ,
military , or space tech. even with WW3, also why is the american arm so
limited while everything cool is on then french arm . do any of you
people really think this would happen ? . seems to me that the author was
going out of his way to break conventional thinking on the future .=20

D. the 2300 system , it was a burden to play and combat was long and
complex , if I were not a math major I would have been lost . combat
should be quick and deadly
 [ CT , T4 ] and character gen should be as quick as possible . maybe
2300AD would be o.k. if it used the T4 system and cleaned up some of the
stupid background quirks=20
the concept of the united states not being the world leader in the future
seems highly improbable .  IMHO ..  =20

Jim McKee
pro solomani

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 07:04:24 -0500
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: FF&S2 laser small arms question

	Quick question here; is focal array diameter analogous to caliber
(i.e. would a laser pistol with a 30-cm focal array diameter look more like
a parabolic mike than a pistol)?

	I've been wondering whether it's possible to design a non-belt pack
TL-12 laser pistol by sacrificing damage rating (going for 2d instead of
5d) and battery capacity, but have found the laser design sequence in the
playtest copy of FF&S2 less than easily comprehensible.

	Can someone enlighten me?

RE GURPS Trav: sounds promising; just about every SJG product that I've
bought has been worth the money.  And the setting sounds promising.  If I
ever get the chance to run another campaign (it looks like bar school is
going to swiftly kill my current one) it might very well be in the GURPS
version...

Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 07:34:27 -0500
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: Re: Traveller: The Technogeeking

Leonard Erickson wrote:
>
[autosnippage]
>>
>>         It'd be fun, actually; the whole WoD gothgloomangsting thing can
>> get kinda old on you, and right now I'm in a serious gearhead mankind
>> overcoming hostile environments with high tech sorta mood...  at a
>> sufficiently high TL, dealing with vampire infestations shouldn't be a
>> problem :).
>
>Never forget that if *you* can use the goodies, so can the other side.


	See below.


>
>Consider what vampiric strength and speed can do augmented by BD. And I
>have no doubt that they'll figure out how to technologically augment
>their other special abilities.


	No, thank you, I'd rather not :).


>
>Heck, you can "explain" all the vampires, werewolves, etc as being
>minor human races from planets where something strange happened. :-)
>
>Nightmare of the week: A Zhodani teleport commando who has been
>vampirized *and* bitten by a werewolf.


	Ick.  Sounds like a Munchkin wetdream.  Actually, the sort of
crossover I was thinking of would be a handwaving (bad misjump) dropping of
a battalion of fully equipped and armed to the teeth mercs or marines into
the World of Darkness setting, not importing Vampires into Trav.
Basically, it'd be a reaction to the thin layer of cheese coating all WW
games, not importing it fullblown into Traveller.  Ye gods man... do you
have any idea of what a munchkin whose Brjuah has 4 dots in celerity could
do with said Brjuah in battledress :)?

	I could see it working as a lotsa beer and even more pretzels
one-shot one-evening one-joke kidding around adventure; anything more would
be just too silly.  I was kinda thinking about the horror on a Sabbat
pack's face when their Creation Rites suddenly get interrupted by FGMP
rounds, GaussMG fire, and fang-blunting BD with chest-mounted AP mines.
SFX: blood, shreds of black leather, bits of silver jewellry, and tattered
remnants of tortured tragically hipper than thou attitudes raining down
everywhere.

	It'd have to be a big Sabbat pack, or else the whole combat
wouldn't last more than half an hour game time.

	Conclusion of course would have to involve contacting the Void
Engineers (or most likely getting contacted by _them_) and winging some
sort of technomagick return to the normal Trav universe.  So it'd have to
involve a minor Mage crossover as well.  Hm. Maybe this idea wasn't such a
good one after all :).


Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 14:08:41 +0100 (BST)
From: Ewan Quibell <E.D.Quibell@bton.ac.uk>
Subject: RE: France in 2300AD (was Traveller-digest V1997 #1789)

>C. 2300 AD , the back ground was alright if you like the idea of the
>french rulings the world after twilight 2000 , of course when I buy or
>play a game that is set on earth I expect some small degree of realism ,

Although I have never read 2300AD and only know a little of the
background, I thought it was a 'hard science' game, someone please correct
me if I'm wrong. Which would mean it's sthe most realistic Sci-Fi RPG
there is ?

>Can any one name any ground war in europe that france didn't get raped in
>?

They ruled Europe for a time in the 18th and 19th centry, and it took the
rest of us a long time to stop them ....

>Basically 2300 irked me because I had a hard time thinking the united
>states would ever fall behind canada france and africa in industry ,
>military , or space tech. even with WW3, also why is the american arm so
>limited while everything cool is on then french arm . do any of you
>people really think this would happen ? . seems to me that the author was
>going out of his way to break conventional thinking on the future . 

As I said before I have not read the background, but it would seem to me
that after WW3, if any of us were still around (ie if the US, the USSR,
China, etc didn't completly kill everything on the earth exept the
cockroaches), the major players  (US, USSR) wouldn't have an
industrial base left that wasn't nuked ... This would leave the secondary
players to rule the world, ie France, Canada, and Africa. France has the
population and the technology, Canada has the technology and Africa has
the population. The new dominant language would be French, as the above
all speak it, and the rest of us would be trying to catch up, and
learning French. Seems more than a reasonable explination of why the
above are the dominant countries in 2300AD, and I've never read the
background ...

Just MHO

Ewan

	Ewan Quibell
	Data Communications Technician        The Game's afoot:
	Computer Centre                       Follow your spirit, and apon
	University of Brighton                  this charge
                                              Cry 'God for Harry, England,
	E.D.Quibell@brighton.ac.uk              and Saint George !'
	http://www.comp.it.bton.ac.uk/~edq/
                                                    Henry V 3:1
	#include<stddisclamer.h>                    W. Shakespeare

	My spelling is entierly due to dyslexia, typoes and poetic license

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 8 Sep 97 09:43:33 -0400
From: Derek Wildstar <wildstar@qrc.com>
Subject: re: Thoughts on roleplaying

Personally, I feel that online gaming, even with the relatively primitive
game engines available today, has several exciting possibilities.  I've
had some experience with MUCK and MOO text-only game engines, and have
seen (and participated in) role-playing as good as the best I've
experienced in face-to-face RPGs.  I haven't tried any of the graphic-based
games (such as Furcadia), but I'd expect that this technology will only get
better over the next few years.

If anything, I feel that it's easier to "get into" character, because
there are fewer distractions.  It's a lot easier to suspend disbelief and
think of the other participants as half-elven enchantresses, Vargr, or
whatever when all you have to form your opinion is the in-game descriptions
and activities.  In face-to-face role-playing, it's easier to get distracted
and loose the thread of the role-playing (and it does't help when the player
of that half-elven enchantress scratches his beard and asks you to pass the
pretzels).

It's also worth noting that SJGames has announced that they will be
re-starting their MetaVerse using a MOO engine (and with the GURPS rules
embedded in it).  I'll be interested to see what this looks like.


I've toyed with the idea of setting up a Traveller MU* (either MUCK or MOO,
because that's what I've got experience with).  It could be relatively easy
to set up.  The permanenet portions of the MUCK would comprise a starship
(something large, like an Azhanti High Lightning) and it's subsidiary craft.
The players would be the crew of this ship, on some type of exploratory
mission (there were several AHL's converted by the IISS as long-range
exploratory cruisers).

Periodically, the referee would disconnect the Azhanti's exits from the rest
of the database (a week in "jumpspace"), and a week later connect them to
a new destination system for exploring and adventuring.  After a suitably
long time in the system (during which time the referee would be creating the
next destination), the ship could jump again.

Unfortunately, I don't have the time (or the server hardware) to try this
experiment.  It would be interesting, though.

There's a reason for trying a MUCK - I've seen code for a "terraform" system
for MUCKs.  This is an ingenious program for allowing the referee to define
an entire planet (by creating a planetary map).  The players can then enter
the system and explore it, down to the point of traversing terrain on the
surface and encountering various special features coded into the map.


wildstar@qrc.com
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   "Dreams do not vanish, so long as people do
                                    not abandon them."  --- Phantom F. Harlock

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 08:59:56 -0500 (CDT)
From: jatkins6@ix.netcom.com (John Atkinson)
Subject: Re: Battle dress turtles  (was RE: Traveller-digest V1997  #1764

You wrote: 

>Sure you have! Ever see a neon bulb (*not* a fluorescent tube, which
>the Brits mis-call "neon"). That glowing gas is a plasma. The glow
>comes from the photons emitted as electrons recombine with the ionized
>atoms. 

I'm not exactally a physics major, in case you havn't guessed.  :)  OK, 
so I presume a Heplar engine has a visual signature literally like neon 
sign.  Kinda makes stealthing a moot point.  :)

John M. Atkinson

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 08:57:46 -0500 (CDT)
From: jatkins6@ix.netcom.com (John Atkinson)
Subject: Re: Tech Levels

You wrote: 

>There are, at least on Terra, TL-0 agrarian societies, as well as TL1+
>nomadic ones.  The lower end of the TL scale has always been a little
>over-simplified for my taste.

Maybe it's because of my habit to think in military terms, but the 
breakpoints are pretty easily defined for the TL 1-3 stuff.

TL 0 Stone weapons
TL 1 Metal weapons, No gunpowder
TL 2 Gunpowder
TL 3 mass produced Rifled muskets with percussion caps

The rest of the things associated with a certain TL is pretty fluid.  
One could have medicine little above the witchdoctor stage, and 
flintlock muskets, while another culture has chipped flint arrowheads 
and extensive knowledge of herbal remedies. . . Or one could be at the 
center of a flourishing intellectual renaissance in math and science, 
but be outdone because your nextdoor neighbors are busy inventing 
gunpowder while scientific knowledge is at the flat-earth stage.  Just 
ask the Arabs.

John M. Atkinson

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1791
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Monday, September 8 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1792



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1789
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1789
Ships Boat
Re: The Gateway Book - Replies to Various Comments (LONG)
>Old Cthuluhu!  Muhahahahahaaaa! (was: Re: GURPS Trav (T-5?))
Re: Plague of Duskir & Canon
RE: France in 2300AD (was Traveller-digest V1997 #1789)
Re: GURPS Traveller

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 10:15:46 +0000
From: jasonj@camitel.com
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1789

Kenji Schwarz wrote:

> What's up with this list?  I go away for a week or two, come back in order
> to post a continuation of the writeup of everyone's favorite triggerhappy
> mutant Commie lesbian minor race, and find the list full of GURPS
> squabbles, epidemiology debates, CSC Yugos, and huggable Cthulhus.  What
> drugs are you people ON? 

	Ahhh..You're just jealous because we're not sharing :) 

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 09:28:43 -0500 (CDT)
From: jatkins6@ix.netcom.com (John Atkinson)
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1789

You wrote: 

>when I saw aliens archive I was expecting the major races not a bunch of
>silly minor races suitable only for a crappy ST episode . the tekundu 

No.  I expect that when/if T4 does the major races, then each one will 
take an entire damn book.  However, if you look at the Milleu 0 setting 
rationally, the Empire doesn't run into any major races for a while.  
The nearest major race to Sylea is what. . . the Vargr, who are in the 
Meshan sector, a full sector and a half from Sylea.  So I'd expect in  
a Milleu 0 setting not to run into anyone for quite a while (depending 
on the rate of Imperial expansion)

>C. 2300 AD , the back ground was alright if you like the idea of the
>french rulings the world after twilight 2000 , of course when I buy or
>play a game that is set on earth I expect some small degree of realism 
,
>Can any one name any ground war in europe that france didn't get raped 
in

Yeah.  The war against the First Coalition which ended in 1795.  The 
Italian campaign of 1796-1797.  The war against the Second Coalition 
which ended after Marengo (though England did not sign the peace treaty 
until March 27, 1802).  The Third Coalition was broken at Ulm and 
Austerlitz, though the war against England didn't do so well (though it 
doesn't meet your definition since it was primarily naval conflict).    
The war against the Fourth Coalition which was defeated in two 
campaigns, the Prussian Army being destroyed at Auerstadt and Jena, and 
the Russian Army at Friedland.  The Fifth Coalition was broken up by 
French victory at Wagram.    Any question?

>? Basically 2300 irked me because I had a hard time thinking the united
>states would ever fall behind canada france and africa in industry ,
>military , or space tech. even with WW3, also why is the american arm so

Gee, I thought I was nationalistic.  You win the Redneck Award in the 
'Not Likin' Furriners Much' category.

John M. Atkinson

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 10:55:11 -0400
From: "Svenson, Gregory (FL51)" <gsvenson@space.honeywell.com>
Subject: Ships Boat

>20 ton ships boats are used through out known space and come in may
>sizes and shapes. This one is intended for routine shuttle work when the
>freighter/liner it is attached to is unable to dock or land for some reason.
>It is not
>intended for use in long duration missions. It is occasionally found with
>small
>vehicle weapons mounted on it.
>
>Ships Boat (TL12)
>Designed by Greg Svenson
>
>Summary:
>     20 displacement tons cylinder streamlined; 220.3263 tones; 5.196 MCr
>Hull:
>     280 KL cylinder streamlined (16.2 M long x 4.7 M wide x 4.7 M high);
>Structure: 24.734 tons of SD, rated for 5 Gs, body 1 cm thick, 11 armor
>rating
>
>Performance:
>     21.6 MW TL12 Fusion Plus power plant; Fuel: 684 L of enriched
>water, 96
>     hour supply (4 days)
>     Propulsion System: 17 MW Thruster Plates; Maximum Acceleration:
>2.2G/4.9G
>Range:
>Crew & Passengers:
>     Crew: pilot, engineer; 8 passengers; 10 roomy seats; gravity
>compensators
>     rated for 5 Gs
>Communications:
>     Orbital Radio-12 DA
>     Orbital Laser-12 DA
>Sensors:
>     Regional Radar-12
>     Regional Optical-12
>Other:
>     1 Airlock, Roadgrid, Fire suppression, 2 Emergency Wall Patch-10
>     202.5 kL (15 tones) of cargo space, small cargo hatch
>     5 kL equipment locker
>
>Designed with Vehicle_Factory.XLS by Glenn Hoppe
>

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 10:39:31 -0500 (CDT)
From: jatkins6@ix.netcom.com (John Atkinson)
Subject: Re: The Gateway Book - Replies to Various Comments (LONG)

You wrote: 

>The US still has a shoulder fired Recoiless Rifle in its inventory.. 
the
>90mm.  Used only by the Ranger battalions these days, itis just to 
useful
>to get rid of.  

Well, given missions typically carried out by Ranger BNs, it's unlikely 
they'll be able to get much heavy direct fire support, or even arty.  
RR fills a narrow niche.  Which calls for better performance at range 
than a LAAW!

>OK, I whipped out the spreadshet and a 5mm, 3:1 sg11 round at 1229J 
weighs
>3.6 grams.  1229J gives a 3G3 DV of 43, which is the minimum for T$ 
damage 4.

Yeah, but using the T4 FFS sequence, a 5mm caseless TL 10 round rated 
at 1229J weighs 4.8 grams, almost exactally.  I was just thinking 
(silly me) that weapons referenced in one supplement for a game system 
should be able to be built using the small arms design sequence in the 
other supplement for the same game.  More the fool me, I suppose.  If 
I'm overlooking something (I slipped up on the TNE FFS armor weight 
calculations to the tune of a couple hundred tons once, so I can make 
mistakes anywhere!) let me know.

John M. Atkinson

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 08 Sep 1997 09:09:13 -0700
From: "Glenn M. Goffin, Esq." <gmgoffin@pacbell.net>
Subject: >Old Cthuluhu!  Muhahahahahaaaa! (was: Re: GURPS Trav (T-5?))

> Date: Sat, 06 Sep 1997 04:53:12 -0800
> From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
 
> know about the great Great Cthulhu plush.  (I will admit that I am
> somewhat frustrated by the inability of the plush to cause SAN loses).

How do you know that you're not taking SAN losses every time you look at
it?  Go get some help.

- --Glenn

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 18:20:38 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Plague of Duskir & Canon

Phillip McGregor writes:
>>From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
>>
>>I think maybe that's one way I have another attitude to canon than you do.
>>You seem to insist that if a theory is more plausible than canon, then it
>>is to be preferred to canon. There I disagree with you. IMO, once something
> 
>Well, yes and no. Since even "canon" doesn't actually provide us with a lot 
>>of "fact" on anything much at all, 

Which is all the more reason to stick as closely as possible to the few facts
we do have. I don't think I've yet (in this discussion) mentioned why I think
it is important to keep to canon whenever possible. It is to avoid creating
some bit of detail in my own campaign that makes it impossible for me to use
a subsequently published adventure module. If I make up an adventure for my
players that takes place on a planet that was once almost depopulated by one
of the PoD plagues, then I'll be unable to use an adventure that revolves
around proving that it never happened at all.  

>and since it has proven fairly mutable over the years, 

Considering the number of different people involved and the amount of material 
that has been produced, I think that until the recent controversial T4
material things weren't all that bad. It is, I think, impossible for anyone
to keep everything straight when so many people work on something for so many
years, but that dosen't mean one shouldn't try as hard as possible to
eliminate mistakes. Just the opposite, in fact.
  
>and since it is (when you consider it closely) the Third Imperium's
>*official* version of events that (in this case) 

The  two sources I have for the Plague of Duskir are the Solomani-viewpoint
piece in _Rats&Cats_ and the authorial-voice piece in TD#20. Is there an 
entry in _Imperial Encyclopedia_ too? (I'll check that myself when I get
home).

>happened thousands of years before, and before the Long Night as well, then 
>you can see that the validity of *anything* that is canon can *always* be 
>called into doubt *if* there is a more plausible explanation.

I don't care a stuffed owl for how many years ago it is. If I, a properly
authorized referee (I bought the books, that makes me authorized ;-), is
informed of a fact by the creators of the game background, then that fact
should stay a fact. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the historical
process we know of in the real world. This history is being created, not
observed and recorded.

>>is established as a fact, a sort of reverse burden of proof applies. In
>>order to reject a canonical fact it must be completely implausible, not just
>>more implausible than some other possibility. After all, historically, some 
>>pretty long shots have come off once in a while.
> 
>So, you still believe in Solar Powered multiple JDrives (Annic Nova) 

Advanced super-science by an unknown race. Yep. That I'll accept. There is
another example of such a ship in _Secret of the Ancients_ (well, it carried
around a lifetime supply of fuel in a pocket universe. Perhaps the Annic
Nova does the same.)

>and Jump Torpedoes (Leviathan?). 

I guess you don't recall that I designed a workable jump torpedo the last
time that particular bit of canon was discussed.

>They were *canon* in their day. 

They still are as far as I am concerned. But I'll agree with your basic
point. Keeping canon straight is important IMO, but it is not the only
important thing. Internal consistency and playability are even more
important. 

>And you accept the revisionistic nature of claims about the nature of TL16
>Darrian tech in the Regency Handbook. 

No, I don't. That is just exactly an example of what I don't like to see.
It invalidate previously published material without adding anything
important to compensate.

>>I'll expand on this theme a bit further down. Meanwhile, the fact that we
>>don't know of any disease that behaves just the way that is needed to
>>explain some odd canonical fact is no proof that such a disease couldn't
>>exist. 
> 
>No. Sure. But just because some Vilani nationalist claims that the PoD was a
>megaplague several thousand years later, on ghu knows what sort of evidence 
>that still exists, do we believe him?

Of course not. But if one of the creators of the game background states that
that's the way it is, then we should take him seriously. And so should every
later creator.

>Think of the controversy (ongoing) of where all the people went after the
>collapse of the Roman Empire in the west.

Irrelevant. Historians are trying their best to figure out one immutable
set of happenings. (Just because we don't know what direction one tribe
went dosen't meant that it took more than one. We may never know the truth,
but there is one). The game creators are trying to work out a background
for the game. The two situations cannot be compared at all.

>In that sense, even Traveller "canon" ... ESPECIALLY when it makes comments 
>on events far in the past ... is *very* mutable. 

There is no "far in the past" when we're talking about something written 5
or 10 years ago.

>And, of course, if we're arguing "canon", then where does *Gateway* fit in?
>Answer: It doesn't. It directly contradicts "canon".

I've already said that I can't argue about "Gateway", because I haven't seen
it. But if it contradicts canon, then it is bad, bad, I tell you, BAD!!!
(Hit it with a rolled-up newspaper!)
 
>>>The only way that I can see your "solution" being an actual solution is
>>>if you are prepared to ditch the idea of the vulnerability of the Vilani 
>>>immune system (which I realise isn't yours, but you *have* supported it) 
>>>as it would  seem to contradict it -- to me, at least.
>>
>>I don't follow your logic here (But I'll be happy to ditch that theory if
>>a better one comes along).
> 
>You accept Annic Nova was "canon" and that "Leviathan" was canon? 

Just those two examples I accept, but I have to admit that there are 
problems with the early CT publications. Quite understandable, of course.
GDW was just piecing together the first tentative framework and there are
a number of things that can't be true (see my sig. for an example). But
I never claimed that canon should be adhered to if it was impossible. I
just say that a less propably, but still possible, canonical fact should
be preferred to a more propable, but non-canonical fact.  

>And that "Darrians" was "canon" ... and you accept (I presume) the complete 
>about face that took place to contradict each and every one of these? 

I'm most certainly reluctant to accept the loss of potency of TL 16 ships.
I suppose that if we one day get a complete and internally consistent ship 
design system that dosen't make TL 16 designs much better than TL 15 
designs, then I will be forced to accept it. Even then I'll insist that
their neighbors all thought that the designs were much better than they 
were until they developed TL 16 designs of their own. Still, I believe
that the break in canon here comes from a design system that dosen't
take this canonical fact into account. Changing the design system would
be better than changing the canon.

*IF* Gateway is canonical (and IG allowed it to be republished with no change 
>in this important aspect, so they had a chance to bring it into line if they 
>had wanted, and only a modest change would have been needed to do so), 

Come on! You can't seriously mean to argue that the fact that IG didn't
change anything in "Gateway" implies that they even thought about this
question for one tiny moment!?

>then it makes a mockery of the previous canon of Vilani vulnerability 

Assuming for purposes of argument that you're are right about "Gateway"
breaking canon, then all you've proven is that "Gateway" breaks canon.
What I am discussing is whether the Plague of Duskir story is 1) 
sufficiently impossible to warrant changing canon and 2) just how small
a change is necessary. 

>to Terran diseases, as does the character creation system of all versions of 
>Traveller ... there is no provision for racial Vilani to be susceptible to 
>Terran diseases to a much greater extent than Terrans.

That is because racial Vilani descended from the survivors of the PoD plagues
are not as suceptible to disease as their ancestors were. That's called
evolution in action. I simply can't understand that you have a problem with
this.

>>No, but so what? The Amerindians weren't nearly as different from the 
>>Europeans as we know the Vilani are from Terrans.
> 
>And, assuming that they had had them at the time, modern antibiotics would 
>have KO'ed any bacterial diseases that the Amerindians may have picked up 
>from the invaders. 

Always provided that those bacterial diseases haven't adapted to  those
modern antbiotics.

>And you're still missing the point -- it doesn't matter *how* different the
>Vilani are or aren't ... the diseases that they are subject to don't change. 
>If Terrans who get them can be treated successfully with antibiotics and
>antivirals, then Vilani will be as well. 

And you're still missing it too. The diseases that kills the Vilani are not
dangerous to the Terrans, so they don't treat them.

>Even though Penicillin is now reduced in effectiveness, the diseases that it
>treated are now treatable with different antibiotics, and there is an ongoing
>race to develop new antibiotics to replace these newer ones. Unless *all*
>diseases develop into something like VRE (antibiotic resistant golden staph),

It dosen't have to be all of them, just some of them.

>in which case the Terrans will have been ravaged by disease as much as the 
>Vilani,

I hope I manage to state it clearly enough this time: _The diseases that 
killed the Vilani were not dangerous to the Terrans_.

>and no new developments are made in disease fighting tech, then the 
>assumption must be (and it is in the game system) 

It may be in the game system, but it most certainly is not so in the game
background. I repeat, there are plenty of mention of uncurable diseases in
the background material.

>that disease will never be a significant problem for any of the various 
>brands of interstellar humanity. Even in Milieu 0, the same TL as the 
>Terrans who beat the ZS, they have no problems with disease -- 

Where do you get that? Are there any T4 rules about disease treatment 
anywhere (I'll have to check my copy).

>>>Which still doesn't explain how Terran treatments don't work -- 
>>
>>It works this way: You invent an antibiotic. You use it. Eventually some bugs
>>comes along that has developed an immunity to said drug. You then invent a 
>>better one and the cycle continues. In the meantime all Terrans carry around 
>>something we'll call Bug A. Bug A is a harmless little critter that gives
>>you a mild fever when you first contract it whereafter you become immune to
>>it and carries it around with no ill effect to show for it. One day you get
>>infected by Bug B, a nasty little critter that causes swollen joints and
>>sore throat. You dose it with Wonder Drug and keep on dosing until you've
> 
>My understanding is that antibiotics tend to be pretty specific. Take e coli,
>for example, normal antibiotic treatments have no discernible effect on its
>symbiotic presence in the human gut at all. Sure, there are *some* antibiotics
>that will kill it off when treating something else, and you will need to swallow
>e coli capsules to repopulate your gut, but the diseases in question are pretty
>rare ... limited, effectively, to third world (and worse) conditions, and not
>all that common even there. So most of these "minor" diseases will not be
>affected by antibiotics in the way you suggest -- they will never gain the
>resistance you suggest.

But it dosen't have to be most of the minor diseases. It just have to be
enough of them to affect the Vilani.

>>Then one day you go along to Dingir, breathe on a Vilani, and give him Bug A,
>>which has a much nastier effect on him. And when you try to treat him with
>>Wonder Drug and Super Wonder Drug and Super Collossal Wonder Drug, you find
>>that Bug A is immune to everything you can throw at it.
> 
>As I said, this isn't the way it works. Unless you posit that the WD, SWD and
>SCWD have no effect on Terrans for many diseases as well, and this is not the
>case.

Yes, that is exactly what is claimed by the canonical references. That the
Vilani were killed by diseases that didn't affect the Terrans. Digestive
bacteria are even mentioned as one of the components.
 
>>>These antibiotics and antivirals are hardly difficult to produce -- and 
>>>local tech could easily be converted. 
>>
>>If the Vilani medical technology lags behind their general TL 11 by one or
>>two and the bugs have adapted to TL 13 remedies, then it is quite possible
>>that you couldn't adapt the Vilani technology.
> 
>Producing Antibiotics and Antivirals, given any sort of industrial base at 
>all, will never be a problem. 

Producing present day antibiotics and antiviral may never be a problem, but
how can you presume to say anything about what is needed to produce TL 12
versions of the same? You just assume that it will be equally facile, an
assumption that simply does not follow.

>Remember, the Terrans had been fighting (and had occupied) Vilani worlds for
>hundreds of years before the collapse. 

The Plague of Duskir was long before the collapse. TD#20 says that the most
famous of these diseases, the Plague of Duskir, occurred in the wake of
advancing Solomani troops. It also refer to other infections brought by
Terran PoWs and by Solomani settlers._Rats&Cats_ claim that the PoD came
from the settlers. But in any case it was something that happened early on.

>They *KNEW* what was likely to happen from this experience -- and it still 
>boils down to the requirement that you believe the Terrans and Terran 
>Military *DELIBERATELY* allowed the PoD to happen by making no preparations. 
>There is no possible *economic* reason to allow this, 

Actually, there is. Transporting wealth between worlds takes cargo space. It
is actually much better for a Terran immigrant to  be able to take over an
empty appartment and a vacant job than to start with just what he could
carry along with him on the trip. (Actually, many Terrans propably stole
(in the most legal way possibly, of course) what they needed to establish
themselves. If their Vilani victims resisted that actively, getting rid of
some of them could be an attractive option. It's a vile idea, but people
have an amazing ability to rationalize vile ideas. 

>unless you assume really base, vile, brutal and active Terran planning to 
>allow it to happen. Sorry, I don't believe that even the Solomani of CTrav 
>would be so vile -- they want dem slaves, massa.

Another unproven assumption.

>>I checked the sources last night, and according to TD#20 the first
>>infections came from Terran POWs.
> 
>Sure, and the Vilani had had Terran POWs for hundreds of years. Yet the PoD 
>only started well *after* the collapse of the ZS. 

What is your source for this fact?

>Again, are you seriously proposing a deliberate and vile Terran plan to more 
>than decimate their new slaves/subjects/citizens? 

I'm certainly not proposing an overall plan on the part of Estigarriba. But
I could well believe that on some planets the _locals_ might employ such
means.

>I don't think that this can be justified on what we know. If the Terrans 
>were truly so vile, 

You know precisely how vile the Terrans must have been. Take a look in any
newspaper under world events. Some are vile, some are not. Sometimes one
view prevails, sometimes the other.

>>No, I don't. What we have here is a canonical fact (lots of Vilani died) and
>>a canonical explanation. You claim that it couldn't have happened that way.
>>Maybe you're right. If so, we have a fact and an explanation that dosen't
>>make sense. Now, some people, and I suspect that it is the kind you think
>>of as 'canon-heads', would say "I don't care if it is impossible, canon says
>>it happened, so it happened". I share your disdain for that attitude. If
>>something dosen't make sense, then it should be changed to something that
>>does. But you want to "explain" it by, essentially, saying: "It didn't 
>>happen at all". I hope you won't take offense, but I have only a little 
>>more respect for that attitude. My inclination is to say: "It happened, but 
>>perhaps not in quite that way and not for quite those reasons". In other 
>>words, to change as little as possible of the previously published facts.
> 
>So, like I said, you agree in multiple Jump Drives and Solar Powered Jump 
>Drives (as per Annic Nova), Jump Torpedoes (as per Leviathan) and the 
>several orders of magnitude better than TL15 of TL16?

Bad examples, but to answer the point you are trying to make, I did say
"as little _as possible_". I just don't agree with you that whatever
discrepancies the PoD story have, they can't be reconciled by something
less drastic than saying that it didn't happen at all.

>No, I'm not saying it didn't happen at all. Its even possible that on some
>planets it was quite bad. However, overall, I would expect that it would be
>lucky if 3-5% of the population died -- 

On most planets you may well be right, but it is said that on some planets 
(ie. more than one) the deaths killed off enough Vilani to leave the Terran 
immigrants in the majority. I should think that this would be on planets
close to Terra, where the logistics of space travel would allow the Terrans
to immigrate in larger than average numbers. This would both introduce more
disease carriers and mean that fewer Vilani need to die before the Terrans
become the majority.
 
>and probably not of any disease, per 
>se, but of side effects resulting from the perfectly normal social chaos that
>inevitably follows such an event as the Terran victory over the ZS. It seems 
>to me what we most likely have is an "Other Losses" type of controversy -- 
>someone who wasn't there and who hasn't or won't (or can't, because the 2000 
>year old records don't exist) check looking at a column "Other Losses" and 
>extrapolating vile nastiness where none, in fact, exists. This is a much 
>more likely explanation.

But I'm not interested in the MOST likely explanation. I'm interested in a
possible explanation that conforms as closely as possible to canon.

>>Now, maybe I'm doing you an injustice. Goodness knows that there are facts
>>that I can't explain in any way (How the Aslan _ihatei_ managed to conquer
>>Tobia and why Norris allowed the Vargr to encroach on the Domain of Deneb,
>>for two examples), and in both cases I'm willing to argue that "It didn't
>>happen at all". If that is the way things are for you here  --  that you
>>would prefer to find a plausible explanation, but haven't been able to --
>>then I think it could be worthwhile to continue the discussion. But if you 
>>actually prefer "It didn't happen at all" to "It happened, but not quite
>>that way", then I think we should just agree to disagree.
> 
>No, what I have been *meaning* to say all along (and thought I *was* saying
>:-{ was that the PoD was vastly overrated ... which seems to me to be "It 
>happened, but not quite that way."

We seem to be approaching a consensus ;-)
 
>>>But we have no "evidence" of massive die offs, and a lot of circumstantial
>>>evidence to show why it would be unlikely to have occurred at all.
>>
>>Yes we have. _S&A_ may have been viewpoint writing (and you'll still have
>>to come up with an explanation why a Solomani is spouting Vilani claptrap),
>>but the article in TD#20 is pure authorial voice. According to that the
>>plagues killed over a billion people on several thousand worlds.
>>
>>(As an aside, this works out at an average of 500,000+ people per planet.
>>Undoubtedly there were planets with a lot more than the average number of
>>deaths, but if the plagues really did leave Solomani immigrants as the
>>majority on some planets, then many Vilani planets must have had
>>populations down in the 10s of millions; something I've argued for before.)
> 
>A billion people in an empire of 10000 worlds! This is a "massive" die off? 

It is certainly enough to create the story of the terrible Plague of Duskir
that killed off many billions. I'm not opposed to some flexibility in
interpreting the viewpoint writing: the library data and articles of the Year 
1100. I just insist that there be some reason for the story. After all, 
Holocaust revisionists wouldn't be claiming that the Holocaust never happened 
if it hadn't happened, now would they ;-). Secondly, I insist that the 
authorial statements remain unchanged (if at all possible).
 
>The worst plague in human history -- the Spanish Flu at the end of WW1 -- 
>was worse than this! 

It killed over a billion people?

>Is *this* what we've been arguing about? It sounds more and more like a 
>historical misinterpretation of an "Other Losses" or collapse of population
>after collapse of Roman Empire kind ... some minor thing being blown out of 
>all proportion!

You're entitled to your opinion, of course, but I for one believe that the
premature death of a billion people is worthy of at least a foot-note in
history... ;-)

>>That's just not true. If the present day Vilani are descended from the part
>>of their predecessors that were stronger than the norm, then it is perfectly
>>plausible that they are stronger too. And, of course, there has been
>>considerable contact with Terrans _since_ the Plague.
> 
>But the argument is that all Vilani had an immune system that had atrophied 
>for 250,000 or more years in the absence of contact with Terran disease 
>organs (something I dispute, but you don't). Thus, if you are arguing a 
>statistical quirk that means some Vilani have a useful immune response, 

What's so quirky about assuming that the Vilani immune system strengths
follow a bell curve?

>we wouldn't be talking a mere 500,000 per planet dying, we would be talking 
>perhaps a 90% or more die back. 

This is sheer hasty thinking. The bell curve can be centered anywhere we
want in order to create the history we want.

>Since we're obviously not, then it seems that all Vilani must
>have had the immunity -- rusty, perhaps, but there waiting to be triggered.

I don't understand how you can claim that. It's like saying that if some
Amerindians survived the measels, then they all should have. Some people
survive diseases that kill other people. There's nothing remarkable about
that.
 
>>I think that in the heat of the discussion you've forgotten that exotic 
>>diseases is a stable of Science Fiction and has been the basis of quite a
>>few Amber Zones. Not only is there plenty of evidence that Milieu 1100 
>>medical knowledge and technology is not perfect, but the loss of plot
>>potential if medicine _was_ perfect is such that if the rules said it
>>was perfect, I would argue to change that, and canon be damned ;-) 
> 
>So? We still don't have PoD's with 90% or greater kill rates on all people in
>the vicinity. Which is what the Gateway Plague assumes -- which is where the
>whole argument started. 

I didn't see the start of (this round of) the argument. Since I don't have 
"Gateway" I'm not arguing about it; I'm arguing about whether the PoD as 
described in MT sources is sufficiently plausible to be accepted as canon.
That said, I believe that there are examples of Ebola killing off whole
villages.

>You will probably have Spanish Flu equivalents (the Spanish Flu wiped out as 
>many people as WW1, but more evenly spread -- perhaps 1.5% of the world 
>population at the time, all in about 12-18 months) ... nasty, but not 100% 
>lethal in weeks.

Possibly the "Gateway" disease is a freak even by Terran standards? In any
case, if "Gateway" takes place in Milieu 0, then it is irrelevant that the
humans involved are Vilani. By this time they must have much the same
resistance as any Solomani.

>>As I argued above, a bug can be exposed to antibiotics without being the
>>target (And, in fact, is much more likely to develop immunity if it isn't).
>>Socondly, I don't think anyone are making any serious effort to stamp out
>>measels, yet measels were lethal to the Amerindians (Or am I thinking
>>about some other childhood disease?).
> 
>And I have explained why this is simply not likely.

And I don't agree with you, but even if I did, it dosen't have to be likely,
it just has to be not too unlikely. Big difference.
 
>>Since the Vilani isn't pushing any "stab in the back" claims (that's just
>>your theory, remember? You can't use a theory to prove itself) the Solomani
>>dosen't have to defend themselves. And, as I said, a disease can be lethal
>>to one group of people and utterly innocuous to another group. 
> 
>OK, its some Solomani academic who is pushing an "Other Losses" theory that, 
>for its own reasons, the 3I is prepared to support. Probably the Solomani 
>themselves think the guy is a crackpot -- so what is the 3I's reason for 
>this? Seems pretty obvious -- they want to demonise the Solomani, which 
>goes great with the reconquest of Earth!

That one went completely by me. Can you rephrase it? I don't get your point
at all.
 

      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "A  subsector  official  pompously states that the
        subsector  armed  forces  have  four Kinunir class
        ships in service,  each with enough troop strength
        to put down any military operations that threathen
        the peace of the Imperium."

                        ---Adventure 1, The Kinunir

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 20:55:01 +2
From: "RFXn" <mlaakso@utu.fi>
Subject: RE: France in 2300AD (was Traveller-digest V1997 #1789)

	(I've only just started playing 2300AD (again, using GURPS rules - 
our group uses GURPS for almost every game and FUDGE for others) so 
I'm not an expert on hte subject. Just tossing in my opinion...)

> >C. 2300 AD , the back ground was alright if you like the idea of the
> >french rulings the world after twilight 2000 , of course when I buy or
> >play a game that is set on earth I expect some small degree of realism ,
> 
> Although I have never read 2300AD and only know a little of the
> background, I thought it was a 'hard science' game, someone please
> correct me if I'm wrong. Which would mean it's sthe most realistic
> Sci-Fi RPG there is ?

	As far as I know, it is.
 
> >Can any one name any ground war in europe that france didn't get raped in
> >?
> 
> They ruled Europe for a time in the 18th and 19th centry, and it
> took the rest of us a long time to stop them ....

	Europe and most of Africa, with several colonies on other 
continents.
 
> >Basically 2300 irked me because I had a hard time thinking the united
> >states would ever fall behind canada france and africa in industry ,
> >military , or space tech. even with WW3, also why is the american arm so
> >limited while everything cool is on then french arm . do any of you
> >people really think this would happen ? . seems to me that the author was
> >going out of his way to break conventional thinking on the future . 

<Ewan's reply - which makes sense BTW - snipped>

	I have no problem with the French being the major power in 2300AD. 
In fact, I'd find it even more plausible to have some Pacific Rim 
countries - virtually untouched by WWIII - running the show in 300 
years. They have both the necessary population and the 
fastest-growing industrial base in the world.

	As for other countries, Africa loads of population but unless their 
internal problems are solved, they are still going to lag behind in 
terms of technology and industry. Canada has more than its share of 
natural resources and the ability to use them. If the problem 
of refugees coming from the former US area is solved, much of the 
high-tech know-how and industrial capacity could be saved.

> Just MHO

	The same.

/RFXn     mlaakso@utu.fi        aka. Matti Laakso
 -Phone: +358-(0)2-237 9928       YO-Kyla 19 A 11
 -IRC: RFXn                       FIN-20540  TURKU
 -Talk: RFXn@delenn.yok.utu.fi    Finland

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 21:05:49 +2
From: "RFXn" <mlaakso@utu.fi>
Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller

On  7 Sep 97 at 17:12, Andrew Boulton wrote:

> Rupert,
> 
> > I'm not sure I like the mostality rate GURPS seems to encourage, or 
> > the way the more powerful characters all seem to start out as 
> > escapees from an asylum.
> 
> Sounds *exactly* like Traveller to me...

	Hehe...depends on the players of course .. hehe.. but yes... they 
usually do.. *grin*

	But seriously, GURPS is the kind of system where GM has to use his 
veto a whole lot more than in other games. Some GMs don't allow more 
than 10 pts mental disadvs, some maintain a draconian 50-point limit 
for starting characters... I often allow players to write up 
character the way the want (without regard to character points), but 
that is because I know my players and know they won't abuse the 
rules. IMHO, GURPS is a system most suitable for adult gamers who are 
well past their munchkin phase and enjoy realistic, character 
interaction oriented style of gaming.


/RFXn     mlaakso@utu.fi        aka. Matti Laakso
 -Phone: +358-(0)2-237 9928       YO-Kyla 19 A 11
 -IRC: RFXn                       FIN-20540  TURKU
 -Talk: RFXn@delenn.yok.utu.fi    Finland

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1792
Traveller-digest     Monday, September 8 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1793



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: The Gateway Book - Replies to Various Comments (LONG)
Re: Mining, core and ice
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1789
Re: Tech Levels
Re: TNE
Re: 101 Books
re: Thoughts on roleplaying
Re: GURPS Traveller
Re: Traveller: The Technogeeking
Re: The Gateway Book - Replies to Various Comments (LONG)
Re: Tech Levels
Re: [TML] Milieu 0 Campaign [Long]
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1789
Re: Mining, core and ice
Re: The Gateway Book - Replies to Various Comments (LONG)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 08 Sep 1997 11:06:09 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: The Gateway Book - Replies to Various Comments (LONG)

At 10:39 AM 9/8/97 -0500, you wrote:

>>OK, I whipped out the spreadshet and a 5mm, 3:1 sg11 round at 1229J 
>weighs
>>3.6 grams.  1229J gives a 3G3 DV of 43, which is the minimum for T$ 
>damage 4.
>
>Yeah, but using the T4 FFS sequence, a 5mm caseless TL 10 round rated 
>at 1229J weighs 4.8 grams, almost exactally.  I was just thinking 
>(silly me) that weapons referenced in one supplement for a game system 
>should be able to be built using the small arms design sequence in the 
>other supplement for the same game.  More the fool me, I suppose.  If 
>I'm overlooking something (I slipped up on the TNE FFS armor weight 
>calculations to the tune of a couple hundred tons once, so I can make 
>mistakes anywhere!) let me know.

Ah, the weapons in EA were designed using 3G3.
- --

+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~+
| Douglas E. Berry       dberry@hooked.net |
|     http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/       |
|------------------------------------------|
| All spelling and grammar errors in this  |
|    message are the fault of El Nino.     |
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~+

  

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 08 Sep 1997 11:02:13 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Mining, core and ice

At 08:02 AM 9/8/97 +0200, you wrote:
>On Sat, 6 Sep 1997, Douglas E. Berry wrote:

>> The core might be molten, dependeding upon the age of the world.  If it's
>> much older than about 3-4 billion years, the core has probably cooled.  An
>> interesting anomoly would be an older world with a high percentage of
>> radioactives and a still molten core.
>
>Any explaination for this anomaly. Are you thinking of a captured planet?
>If not any other reasons for this type of planet to show up around a star
>like this? 

If you just assume a higher percentage of radioactives in the mantle and
core, resulting in a higher temp, you could extend the lifetime of the
molten core out for a good long time..  
- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 08 Sep 1997 11:19:08 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1789

At 03:07 AM 9/8/97 EDT, you wrote:

>A.  the solomani , this is the group that conquered the 1st Imp. and yet
>they are treated as minor players in almost all printed CT, T4 expansions
>. I for one would like to see more on the solomani and more information
>on adventuring in the solomani rim or the border of the solomani rim . I
>think a book detailing the solomani and there lifestyle would be very
>interesting .

Alien Module 6, CT
Solomani and Aslan, MT
Traveller Chronicle 10&11 "Children of Earth" TNE.

>B.  Aliens archive for T4 . this book was a major disappointment ! when I
>shell out      $23.00 for a book I expect it to be something I can use .
>when I saw aliens archive I was expecting the major races not a bunch of
>silly minor races suitable only for a crappy ST episode . the tekundu ?
>what a stupid alien , its a human with the water retention ability of a
>camel ! Tim Brown I want what you were smoking when you came up with this
>stuff .

I'm going to diagree.. I found most of AA to be useful.  The Tenduku are a
human minor race, a Traveller staple for years, but something that has
mostly ignored.

>C. 2300 AD , the back ground was alright if you like the idea of the
>french rulings the world after twilight 2000 , of course when I buy or
>play a game that is set on earth I expect some small degree of realism ,
>Can any one name any ground war in europe that france didn't get raped in
>? Basically 2300 irked me because I had a hard time thinking the united
>states would ever fall behind canada france and africa in industry ,
>military , or space tech. even with WW3, also why is the american arm so
>limited while everything cool is on then french arm . do any of you
>people really think this would happen ? . seems to me that the author was
>going out of his way to break conventional thinking on the future .

As a long time T2K and 2300 player/ref, rember that France sucessfully shut
itself off from the war early on (the famous Dead Zone), and since most of
the war was fought in eastern Germany and points east, escaped much of the
damage.

After the war, France set itself up as a major distributor of aid.  It was
French vessels that finally brought the last American soldiers home.
America had been nuked, and was fighting a three sided civil war (MilGov,
CivGov, and New America.)  France's domination of Europe, plus the ESA's
development of the stutterwarp, allowed them to retain their leadership
position into the late 23rd Century.

This is changing in 2300, however.  The mismanaged War of German
Reunification, the Central Asian War, and the Kafer invasion have all
lowered French prestige.  The heavy use of ASN/USMC troops along the French
Arm has led to the American Renisance.

The American Arm is so limited because that's the way the stars are organized.

>D. the 2300 system , it was a burden to play and combat was long and
>complex , if I were not a math major I would have been lost . combat
>should be quick and deadly
> [ CT , T4 ] and character gen should be as quick as possible . maybe
>2300AD would be o.k. if it used the T4 system and cleaned up some of the
>stupid background quirks 
>the concept of the united states not being the world leader in the future
>seems highly improbable .  IMHO ..   

Ask a British subject c. 1875 who would be the world powers in 50 years.
If you told him that the United States woukld be a power with a large navy,
he'd laugh his ass off.

- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 21:36:01 +2
From: "RFXn" <mlaakso@utu.fi>
Subject: Re: Tech Levels

On  7 Sep 97 at 18:49, Kenji Schwarz wrote:

> There are, at least on Terra, TL-0 agrarian societies, as well as
> TL1+ nomadic ones.  The lower end of the TL scale has always been
> a little over-simplified for my taste.

	Agreed. About nomads, I could easily imagine TL 10 nomadic tribes
lumbering along in their big old freighters (held together by steel
wire, Stik-Kits and prayer), buying, selling, bertering and stealing.

/RFXn     mlaakso@utu.fi        aka. Matti Laakso
 -Phone: +358-(0)2-237 9928       YO-Kyla 19 A 11
 -IRC: RFXn                       FIN-20540  TURKU
 -Talk: RFXn@delenn.yok.utu.fi    Finland

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 11:45:55 -0700
From: Chris Griffen <cgriffen@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: TNE

Zane H. Healy wrote:

>>Zane,
>>
>>Have you ever even played TNE? From your statement, I'm led to believe you
>>haven't.
>>
>>Best,
>>
>>Chris Griffen
>
>No, I've not played it, but I have GM'd it.  Overall it was an excellent
>product, however the basic underlying concept of the Virus I just couldn't
>stomach.  Despite the fact that I can't stomach the main setting, I do own
>all the TNE books.  The two "Domain of Deneb" books really got my intrest
>up, but then TNE died.  While I'd like to see the TNE setting finished out,
>I still can't stand it.

I'm glad you responded. When I read your somewhat inflammatory post, as a
TNE aficionado I was tempted to retaliate with my own flamethrower, but now
I have some perspective on your statement, and I have to say that, to a
degree, I agree with you. I've never liked the Star Vikings setting for
TNE. For me, it wasn't Traveller. I briefly ran an RCES campaign when TNE
first came out and found it left a bad taste in my mouth.

So, I returned to my roots in Deneb and the Spinward Marches. I ran a
Regency campaign, first with preliminary sector stats from the 'net and
later with the Regency Sourcebook. I also was against the Virus theme as it
destroyed the Traveller universe that I had grown to love, but from the
perspective of a Regency campaign, I found it was enjoyable. The Regency is
a civilization on the edge of oblivion. You can play a fairly traditional
Traveller campaign there without having to serve in some capacity raiding
systems or toppling TEDs. The Virus on the fringes theme actually enhanced
the setting.

The key element that makes TNE the best Traveller system, IMO, is its
excellent mechanics. The game was designed from the top down. An underlying
logic was built into the system that guided every subsequent system of the
game. In short, the creators of TNE were excellent planners and developers.

IG has failed miserably to produce a coherent set of mechanics because they
designed from the bottom up. They had CT as their initial basis and they
starting throwing mud on the wall with other mechanical systems (The main
rulebook, Starships, CSC, PE, FF&S2, etc.) to see what would stick. What a
mess!

It's unfortunate that the brief flirtation with CCGs did so much to kill
TNE, because I truly believe that in time it would have established itself
as the best version of Traveller ever.

>TNE is the version of Traveller that introduced me to Traveller, but I
>prefer the Classic setting.  As for Mega, I've never been able to decide if
>I like it or not.

I liked it, but it was riddled with more errata than any other version of
Traveller until T4 came along. MT's task system was terrific, though not
perfect.

Best,

Chris Griffen

===================================================
Keeper of the Flame. Traveller player since 1980.

http://www.best.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: Mon, 08 Sep 1997 14:53:11 -0400 (EDT)
From: tconnor@pop3.utoledo.edu (Tim Connors)
Subject: Re: 101 Books

>Andy Lilly wrote:
>
>>P.S. 101 Rendezvous and 101 Travellers are out. 101 Lifeforms will be out
>>soon. All hand-published by BITS, so I get to check what they look like at
>>every stage in the process. All 101 books come with loads of useful
>>Traveller material for people that referee or play Traveller and enjoy the
>>game. Also guaranteed to have at least one deliberate piece of errata in
>>every book to satisfy those people that just like picking holes in things,
>>rather than doing anything constructive towards promoting Traveller.
>
>------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
>"Omnia Mutantur Nihil Interit"  -  Sandman 'The Wake'
>"Everything Changes, but nothing is truly lost" 
>
        Where can these be obtained?

Tim Connors

You can't fall off of the floor -- most human beings require three years to
learn this.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 21:51:39 +2
From: "RFXn" <mlaakso@utu.fi>
Subject: re: Thoughts on roleplaying

On  8 Sep 97 at 9:43, Derek Wildstar wrote:

> Personally, I feel that online gaming, even with the relatively
> primitive game engines available today, has several exciting
> possibilities.  I've had some experience with MUCK and MOO text-only
> game engines, and have seen (and participated in) role-playing as
> good as the best I've experienced in face-to-face RPGs.  I haven't
> tried any of the graphic-based games (such as Furcadia), but I'd
> expect that this technology will only get better over the next few
> years.

	Now this is (again!) completely off-topic, but I've greatly enjoyed 
playing SubSpace, an online shoot-'em-up game. Besides, it's free (at 
least for now, see http://www.vie.com/subspace). If trying to come up 
with an adventure for next session is about to drive you crazy, 
blasting away a couple of irritating little fighters will (probably) 
make you feel a bit better. Won't help with the adventure though. :)

	PS. I'm usually on CHAOS Zone East, from 7AM to 10AM CET. Tag's 
either Fulcrum-A or Azhanti HL.

/RFXn     mlaakso@utu.fi        aka. Matti Laakso
 -Phone: +358-(0)2-237 9928       YO-Kyla 19 A 11
 -IRC: RFXn                       FIN-20540  TURKU
 -Talk: RFXn@delenn.yok.utu.fi    Finland

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 11:54:56 -0700
From: Chris Griffen <cgriffen@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller

Richard Hough wrote:

>TNE: Thruster plates never existed

Not true. FF&S has provisions for those referees who want to keep thrusters
in their campaigns. The published settings designed for the game employ the
more realistic HEPlaR thrusters, but there's nothing stopping you from
using thrusters if that's what you want to do.

With GURPS Traveller, there's no "Well, the Rebellion and Virus *could*
have happened if you'd like" option, so your comparison is inaccurate.

>T4: TL 15 Second Imperium

Enough has been said on this, I think. Just for the record, I think this
was a big mistake by the creators of T4.

>In any case, TNE has not become invalidated (or at least, no more
>invalidated than it ever was). The GURPS Traveller posting specifically
>stated the new game will take place in an "alternate timeline" and will not
>follow canon.

That is, *if* IG doesn't go out of business, as a company which has
produced such shoddy products is likely to do. At this point, no, SJGTrav
doesn't refute canon, but within the next year, I wouldn't be surprised if
it's the only remaining publisher of new Traveller materials. If and when
that happens, we could be in for a canon schism.

>1: This is how it should have been all along.

I think you should have put an "IMO" in front of that statement, don't you?

>2: I lose as little sleep over my campaign setting "becoming invalidated"
>as I do over the TL 14 vacc suits in Anomalies.

I find both disconcerting.

Best,

Chris Griffen

===================================================
Keeper of the Flame. Traveller player since 1980.

http://www.best.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: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 12:08:27 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Traveller: The Technogeeking

In mail you write:

> Leonard Erickson wrote:
>>
> [autosnippage]
>>>
>>>         It'd be fun, actually; the whole WoD gothgloomangsting thing can
>>> get kinda old on you, and right now I'm in a serious gearhead mankind
>>> overcoming hostile environments with high tech sorta mood...  at a
>>> sufficiently high TL, dealing with vampire infestations shouldn't be a
>>> problem :).
>>
>>Never forget that if *you* can use the goodies, so can the other side.
>
>         See below.
>>Consider what vampiric strength and speed can do augmented by BD. And I
>>have no doubt that they'll figure out how to technologically augment
>>their other special abilities.
>
>         No, thank you, I'd rather not :).
>>Heck, you can "explain" all the vampires, werewolves, etc as being
>>minor human races from planets where something strange happened. :-)
>>
>>Nightmare of the week: A Zhodani teleport commando who has been
>>vampirized *and* bitten by a werewolf.
>
>         Ick.  Sounds like a Munchkin wetdream. 

I was thinking more along the lines of it being something that teaches
the munchkin a lesson. :-)

> Actually, the sort of
> crossover I was thinking of would be a handwaving (bad misjump) dropping of
> a battalion of fully equipped and armed to the teeth mercs or marines into
> the World of Darkness setting, not importing Vampires into Trav.
> Basically, it'd be a reaction to the thin layer of cheese coating all WW
> games, not importing it fullblown into Traveller.  Ye gods man... do you
> have any idea of what a munchkin whose Brjuah has 4 dots in celerity could
> do with said Brjuah in battledress :)?

Like I said, picture Mr. Big Bad Munckin *facing* said Brujah. 

And there are ways of "self-limiting" things if one *did* decide to
import vampires and the like into Traveller. One simple way would be to
rule that the WOD critters die on exposure to jumpspace. So they are
stuck in their system. So you wind up with a *very* strange red zone. 

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 13:00:09 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: Re: The Gateway Book - Replies to Various Comments (LONG)

On Mon, 8 Sep 1997, John Atkinson wrote:
> 
> >OK, I whipped out the spreadshet and a 5mm, 3:1 sg11 round at 1229J 
> weighs
> >3.6 grams.  1229J gives a 3G3 DV of 43, which is the minimum for T$ 
> damage 4.
> 
> Yeah, but using the T4 FFS sequence, a 5mm caseless TL 10 round rated 
> at 1229J weighs 4.8 grams, almost exactally.  I was just thinking 
> (silly me) that weapons referenced in one supplement for a game system 
> should be able to be built using the small arms design sequence in the 
> other supplement for the same game.  More the fool me, I suppose.  If 
> I'm overlooking something (I slipped up on the TNE FFS armor weight 
> calculations to the tune of a couple hundred tons once, so I can make 
> mistakes anywhere!) let me know.

That's because, unfortunately, the first wasn't designed using any 'game
supplement' for T4, but was designed using 3G3.

Originally, 3G3 was _supposed_ to be the weapons design system for T4, but
somewhere alonng the increasingly chaotic course that IG has taken, we've
ended up with several design systems, all allegedly canon.

This is particularly sad, because I _like_ FFS and FFS2, indeed the whole
idea of one source for designing everything. QSDS and SSDS are actually
relatively easy to fix to conform with FFS2. 

Unfortunately, 3G3 and FFS2's weapons design systems are alike enough to
be related, but not twins, ie: you get slightly different statistics for
the same design from each of them. With CSC vs FFS2 you'll also get
different designs. This is what happpens when you comission three
different design systems from two different game design teams. Sigh. All
of the systems are good and have points in their favor. 3G3 is better than
FFS2 IMHO, but since it's the _third_ edition of the book, it had better
damn well be.

That said, FFS2 is a vast improvement over FFS, particularly for wepons
design.

Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 14:07:31 -0700
From: kenji@accessone.com (Kenji Schwarz)
Subject: Re: Tech Levels

John Atkinson wrote:

>You [Kenji] wrote:
>
>>There are, at least on Terra, TL-0 agrarian societies, as well as TL1+
>>nomadic ones.  The lower end of the TL scale has always been a little
>>over-simplified for my taste.
>
>Maybe it's because of my habit to think in military terms, but the
>breakpoints are pretty easily defined for the TL 1-3 stuff.
>
>TL 0 Stone weapons
>TL 1 Metal weapons, No gunpowder
>TL 2 Gunpowder
>TL 3 mass produced Rifled muskets with percussion caps

Hm; I see your point.  Makes sense given GDW's wargaming orientation.  My
own habit is more to think of these things in archeological and
sociohistorical terms, so it looks considerably more arbitrary and
coarse-grained.

>The rest of the things associated with a certain TL is pretty fluid.
>One could have medicine little above the witchdoctor stage, and
>flintlock muskets, while another culture has chipped flint arrowheads
>and extensive knowledge of herbal remedies. . . Or one could be at the
>center of a flourishing intellectual renaissance in math and science,
>but be outdone because your nextdoor neighbors are busy inventing
>gunpowder while scientific knowledge is at the flat-earth stage.  Just
>ask the Arabs.

Agreed... the broken-out tech levels from WBH make a lot of sense, but
again don't help much below the TL-4/5 threshhold, it seems to me.

Kenji Schwarz
kenji@accessone.com

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 08 Sep 1997 18:41:49 -0400
From: Bill Rutherford <worj@topgun.cinecom.com>
Subject: Re: [TML] Milieu 0 Campaign [Long]

At 04:25 AM 9/8/97 EST, Ken wrote:
<Snip>...
>> Pp 139 - 144 contain chapter 12, Worlds in Miliew 0, and provides
>> explanatory notes on making sense of the UWP and fleshing a UWP out into a
>> world description.
>
>OK, I'm curious.  How did they explain away the LL=GG flub?
>

Pp 141 - 143 provides an expanded ULP = Universal Law Profile, which
expands upon and details law level to a seven digit number that replaces
LL.  The book comments that for a casual visit, LL suffices, but if more
detail's needed, supercede the LL with the ULP.  The ULP consists of:
Armament, Commerce, Congregation, Movement, Privacy, Process, and Speech,
each of which runs from 0 - F, with the higher values being the more
repressive wrt individual rights.  This is likely a bit more detail than
I'll use...




Bill Rutherford
worj@topgun.cinecom.com

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 15:57:15 -0700
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1789

Mon, 08 Sep 1997 07:12:24 GMT, aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
>And one they're hooked to GURPS Traveller, I can't see much likelihood of
>crossover sales to IG. After all, they have GURPS Vehicles which is better
>proofread and at least as well playtested as FF&S2 for Vehicle and Vehicle
>Weaponry Design. They have High Tech and Ultra Tech to mine for equipment,
>which
>will replace CSC and EA. They have all sorts of ready to use backgrounds that
>can easily be adapted for adventures and the like. No, I can't see many
>crossover sales from the sort of buyers who buy GURPS Traveller over IG
>Traveller at all.

Actually, this is the big upside.  Sure people will use GURPS material
(I already have Cidi [12" tall furry GURPS alieans with tails] trying to
set up a community at Regina and looking for jobs at the starport)
but they will also be very interested in background material
that is specific to their setting.  This is why Columbia Games
gave permission for articles on GURPS Harn to be published
in Roleplayer.  Sales of background materials to GURPS players
represents a source of sales.

For equipment, one might think that there will be specific book
detailing what is available for the CT/GTrav (CT/GT ? :-) type
background which will probably be the first choice for most.
The advantage of Traveller books here is that you don't have
to sort through differences in GURPS default tech level
progressions and how Traveller tech levels progress.  Buyers
will probably choose between FF&S and GURPS Vehicles (influenced
by what gets mentioned in the GURPS Traveller book) but that
even can be a good thing if it allows those who don't like
one or the other to stick with the system.

GURPS already has a saying that "any supplement is a GURPS
supplement" and they are already used to buy material from
other companies.  This will tend to direct those sales to
IG and may increase them by stimulating more GURPS SF
Gaming.  (In addition to those who buy most of the GURPS
stuff to look over.  I bought GURPS Mage becuase I heard
it had an interesting system, even though I never rune
WOD settings).

[Regarding what will be "canon"....]

The way I look at GT will be _a_ cannon.  The point of cannon
is that you have a consitent background with no contradictions.
Thus each setting only has to be interally constent and the
various takes only need to be "adaptable".

It has been made clear that T4 and GT are different takes
on the same issue and each will have their own canon.  The
expectation is that they will have no _major_ contradictions
until about 1100 or so (when the GT timeline apparently
diverges from whatever T4 is going to do [presumably follow
the rebellion]) to preserve adapatability (ie you can take
the broad sweep of melieu 0 and use it as general historical
background for either T4 or GT.


_______________________________________________________________
DSummers@Mail.ARC.NASA.gov

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 16:26:21 -0700 (PDT)
From: Craig Berry <cberry@cinenet.net>
Subject: Re: Mining, core and ice

> Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 07:58:40 +0200 (MET DST)
> From: Tommy Grav <tommy.grav@astro.uio.no>
> 
> I like the gemstone approach, I might go with that. Would there be a
> higher density of for example diamonds deep inside a planet with a solid
> core? What other minerals would there be for the company to make a profit
> on?

Diamonds are nearly always of organic-carbon origin.  Thus, you wouldn't
be likely to find them on a lifeless world such as yours.  On life-bearing
worlds that do have diamonds, they'd be in the upper crust, associated
with coal beds.  On your world, gems like sapphires, rubies, and emeralds
(for example) would be far more likely; opals would also be an interesting
choice, as these are even more fragile than most gems, and call for almost
manual excavation of the workface to get most of them out intact. 

> > > Some background perhaps. The system has no gas giants, only one rock
> > > orbiting about 0.5AU out. The planet has a rotational periode around its
> > > axis of 300 sederial years at a 5 degrees tilt from the ecliptic plane.
> > > The planet is over 3000km in radius and with a density of 7864 grams per
> > > cubic cm. Would this mean that the core would have to be molten or could
> > > it be solid?
> > 
> > I don't get that rotation figure.  Off the top of my head, such a world's
> > year would be roughly 200 days long or thereabouts -- certainly between
> > 100 and 300, unless my brain's especially dead tonight.  Read at face
> > value, your statement above seems to indicate that the world is almost
> > motionless with respect to the *stars* -- in other words, rotating
> > "backward" (effectively) with respect to its primary.  This is certainly
> > possible -- Venus does qualitatively the same thing, though far less
> > extremely so -- but if you mean something else, please explain what you
> > were after here.
> 
> It wasn't a rotational figure around the sun, but its selfrotation around
> its axis. Therefor its day would be 300 siderial years, while its year is
> as you state around 200 days. I can't find anything on laws for the
> rotation of planets around their own axis so I simple choose a value.
> Comments on this would be appriciated.

It seems a very great coincidence that a world would be so nearly at rest
with respect to the stars, given that no force is drawing it into that
rotation rate via e.g. tidal resonances or the like, and indeed solar
tides would tend to spin it up over time.  That's not to say it couldn't
happen, just that it'd be considered a significant oddity, with scientists
actively investigating how it got that way.

In general, largish bodies (planets and big moons) in our solar system
rotate prograde with respect to the stars (counterclockwise as seen from
solar north).  Most of the moons are tidally locked to their primaries,
and Pluto is mutually locked with its moon Charon.  The rotational periods
vary from about 10 hours for Jupiter to around 55 days for Mercury.

The two exceptions are Uranus, which rotates 'on its side', and Venus,
which rotates 'backward' but very slowly (over hundreds of days, as I
recall).  Nobody has a really good model explaining either of these
planets' rotational behavior.

> > Are you sure that surface temp is right?  0.5 AU from an M3 V, I'd expect
> > more like -150 C.  Your version is only 56 K!
> 
> According to my text book, the formula for the temperature at various
> distances from the star is given by
> 
>       T = Tstar ((1-A)/2)^(1/4) (Rstar/r)^(1/4)
> 
> where Tstar is the temp of the star, Rstar is the stars radius, A is the
> planets albedo and r is the planets distance from the star.
> 
> Here we have r=0.5AU, Tstar=3500K, Rstar=0.5 sunradiuses and A=0.04 
> 
>       T = 3500K * 0.83 * 0.06819 = 198K
> 
> Which is around your suggestion, the 56K value was derived using the
> Alien Planet Generator that I found on the net. Thanks for pointing that
> out to me.

Wow, that's one dark planet!  Not surprised your temp came in 70 K higher.
The Moon is around albedo 0.04, IIRC; your world, which we've all presumed
would have significant surface ices, should be quite a bit higher, at
least 0.2 I'd think.

- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
   |   Craig Berry - cberry@cinenet.net
 --*--    Home Page: http://www.cinenet.net/users/cberry/home.html
   |      Member of The HTML Writers Guild: http://www.hwg.org/   
       "Every man and every woman is a star."

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 19:10:24 -0500 (CDT)
From: jatkins6@ix.netcom.com (John Atkinson)
Subject: Re: The Gateway Book - Replies to Various Comments (LONG)

You wrote: 

>Ah, the weapons in EA were designed using 3G3.

The logic of which is simply astounding. . . 

"Don't buy our products, they are no good.  Buy this other game 
system's products."  Now I know. . . so back to scrounging used book 
stores for TNE stuff.  At least it's self consistent--and where it's 
not, it puts the 'errata' in the back of the book so I can build bigger 
and better versions thereof.

If you're going to bill something as 'The most realistic, comprehensive 
vehicle and equipment design system ever published for science-fiction 
role-playing' (from the back of T4 FF&S) then it ought to be able to 
build the equipment in at least the supplements for that game. . . 

John M. Atkinson 

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1793
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Tuesday, September 9 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1794



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

CT, MT, TNE, T4 vs GURPS, revisited (LONG)
CT, MT, TNE, T4 vs GURPS, revisited (LONG)
Re: Battle dress turtles  (was RE: Traveller-digest V1997  #1764
Vehicle Page Fixed
The dread TIV virus (was RE: GURPS Traveller)
Visigoths, Vandals, and Cassandra Complex (was: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1789)
T4 and multiple design systems...
Re: Tech Levels
Re: The Gateway Book - Replies to Various Comments (LONG)
Solitaire Traveller???
FF&S2-The Good, the Bad, and The Ugly
Re: [TML] Milieu 0 Campaign [Long]
Re: GURPS Traveller
Re: The Gateway Book - Replies to Various Comments (LONG)
In sickness and in hell... (was RE: Thoughts on roleplaying)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 20:27:30 -0400
From: "Daniel Poulin" <pould@netcom.ca>
Subject: CT, MT, TNE, T4 vs GURPS, revisited (LONG)

Wow people, I never thought I would get some of you to get so excited about
things.  Lets all take a deep breath, count to 1000 slowly and breath out
(those that are still alive that is... :-)).

What was in my original message was MY personal opinion on Traveller,
GURPS, and some of the background.  Those of you who like GURPS can play
it, I don't care.  Believe me, the thought that GURPS exists does not keep
me awake at night and I have other things to do than to hate something.  I
have a large collection of GURPS stuff and I believe the supplements for
the game are problably among the best produced for any game.  Some days
ago, one of the posters replied to me presenting his opinion on GURPS and
describing how I was wrong (Sorry I don't remember your name, I destroy
most messages from the TML since I get too many).  I noticed also that my
original message created a lively discussion and for that I am happy.

One of the purpose of the message was to indicate my support to both Loren
and Marc for what I think is a good move (God knows I have complained
against IG and its policies).  Although I will not use the GURPS books, I
think the game needs any help it can get (especially after the treatment is
has been getting from IG).  Any help, including SJG, is quite appreciated. 
I don't know any of the two (Marc or Loren), but I hope that the support
from old timers (that is the way I describe myself) would be appreciated. 
The game does not only exist for them, it must also answer some of the
things that we want, otherwise it will die.  In the past, many games were
created (ever heard of Albedo, Cyborg Commando, Time & Time Again, or
Universe to name a few?), all these games were written by people who liked
gaming and liked their own personal system.  Traveller, on the other hand,
appealed to a large number of people by combining elements of hard science
with space opera.  This is the combination that attracted me.  

Now to reply to some of the comments concerning my dislike

I don't like GURPS for multiple reason.  I believe the unremembered poster
(please forgive me) did demonstrate why I was right (in my own eyes: I am
in complete agreement with everything I say ;-)).  None of the following
comments are to be interpreted in a way to be insulting or challenging to
anyone else's opinion.  They represent the opinion of the writer only.  Any
insult is in the mind of the reader!! <grin>

Difference in creation of characters.

As I said before, Traveller is a character generation system, GURPS is a
character creation one.  While you might consider right for players to play
the same character over and over again, I assume that the purpose of
playing is to roleplay.  It involves being faced with different
personalities, views, advantages and disadvantages.  It also overcoming
poor stats when they are generated.  GURPS is a nice system for players
with imagination to create characters.  Most good roleplayers I know would
not create the same character over and over again.  However, others don't
do that.  We all know the player who will complain and abuse the smaller
points in order to obtain the most.  And no, the simple fact that the GM
can be tough is not the answer.

A set of rules is, ultimately, an agreement between individuals to a set of
conduct.  It is not a distatorship that exists for the enjoyment of the GM
only.  Even house rules have to be approved by the other players.  If not,
the group desintegrates.  It is exactly the same thing about allowing
players to do things or not.  It is quite preferable to answer a question
like: Why can't I do this? by "because the rules say so" instead than by
"because I don't want you to".  One implies a reliability on the policy
established (the rules) while the other indicates a personal decision by a
dictator (the GM).  An answer by an agreed set of rules always reduces
discussions and fights. 

I find a character generation preferable to a character creation system.  I
find it imposes more on players and, ultimately, creates more interesting
characters.  This is one of the reason why I didn't like the TNE character
creation system (or more precisely a mix between creation and generation)
while I liked CT, MT and T4.

GURPS is not very good with tasks.  The 3d6 roll is cumbersome.  I
preferred the MT system that created a better "curve" (on this I can be
proven wrong)  I like the modifiers in MT.  I think GURPS has the same
problems with favorizing tasks that T4 does.  At least, MT favours skills. 
I have always preferred MT on this issue. 

As to tech, I don't think anything comes close to TNE (FF&S is a wonderful
book).  Yes I did not like the absence of thruster plates, on the other
hand, TNE had wonderful feel to it.  Everything was part of a whole (the
system for weapons, ships and vehicles) was ultimately incorporated.  The
optional tech created a wonderful opportunity to introduce other things
into the game.  While I did not like the background of TNE nor the absence
of thruster, I did like its handling of tech.  Let me just mention that I
do use GURPS for some things (Swashbuckler is an example: I am preparing
for a convention in Ottawa this weekend), but I still dislike many aspects
of it.  For example, GURPS handles armor almost like AD&D (armor teleports
you out of the way (I know this is not completely true, but this is
sufficiently close to the truth for the purpose of my demonstration), it
does not differienciate between penetration and damage.  That is one good
point for MT, TNE or T4.

Yes I will miss the Rebellion.  Norris, hero of the 5th frontier war, is
not the same as Norris, Keeper of the Flame (or the man who named himself
Archduke).  I will miss the Regency (even (once again repeating myself) if
I hated the Virus).

I will purchase GURPS traveller.  I will shamelessly rip the ideas out of
it and incorporate it in my own personal campaign.  I am looking forward to
GURPS Traveller.

One last thing, please stop SJG from substituting his Tech levels for
Travellers.

Daniel Poulin
pould@netcom.ca

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 20:27:30 -0400
From: "Daniel Poulin" <pould@netcom.ca>
Subject: CT, MT, TNE, T4 vs GURPS, revisited (LONG)

Wow people, I never thought I would get some of you to get so excited about
things.  Lets all take a deep breath, count to 1000 slowly and breath out
(those that are still alive that is... :-)).

What was in my original message was MY personal opinion on Traveller,
GURPS, and some of the background.  Those of you who like GURPS can play
it, I don't care.  Believe me, the thought that GURPS exists does not keep
me awake at night and I have other things to do than to hate something.  I
have a large collection of GURPS stuff and I believe the supplements for
the game are problably among the best produced for any game.  Some days
ago, one of the posters replied to me presenting his opinion on GURPS and
describing how I was wrong (Sorry I don't remember your name, I destroy
most messages from the TML since I get too many).  I noticed also that my
original message created a lively discussion and for that I am happy.

One of the purpose of the message was to indicate my support to both Loren
and Marc for what I think is a good move (God knows I have complained
against IG and its policies).  Although I will not use the GURPS books, I
think the game needs any help it can get (especially after the treatment is
has been getting from IG).  Any help, including SJG, is quite appreciated. 
I don't know any of the two (Marc or Loren), but I hope that the support
from old timers (that is the way I describe myself) would be appreciated. 
The game does not only exist for them, it must also answer some of the
things that we want, otherwise it will die.  In the past, many games were
created (ever heard of Albedo, Cyborg Commando, Time & Time Again, or
Universe to name a few?), all these games were written by people who liked
gaming and liked their own personal system.  Traveller, on the other hand,
appealed to a large number of people by combining elements of hard science
with space opera.  This is the combination that attracted me.  

Now to reply to some of the comments concerning my dislike

I don't like GURPS for multiple reason.  I believe the unremembered poster
(please forgive me) did demonstrate why I was right (in my own eyes: I am
in complete agreement with everything I say ;-)).  None of the following
comments are to be interpreted in a way to be insulting or challenging to
anyone else's opinion.  They represent the opinion of the writer only.  Any
insult is in the mind of the reader!! <grin>

Difference in creation of characters.

As I said before, Traveller is a character generation system, GURPS is a
character creation one.  While you might consider right for players to play
the same character over and over again, I assume that the purpose of
playing is to roleplay.  It involves being faced with different
personalities, views, advantages and disadvantages.  It also overcoming
poor stats when they are generated.  GURPS is a nice system for players
with imagination to create characters.  Most good roleplayers I know would
not create the same character over and over again.  However, others don't
do that.  We all know the player who will complain and abuse the smaller
points in order to obtain the most.  And no, the simple fact that the GM
can be tough is not the answer.

A set of rules is, ultimately, an agreement between individuals to a set of
conduct.  It is not a distatorship that exists for the enjoyment of the GM
only.  Even house rules have to be approved by the other players.  If not,
the group desintegrates.  It is exactly the same thing about allowing
players to do things or not.  It is quite preferable to answer a question
like: Why can't I do this? by "because the rules say so" instead than by
"because I don't want you to".  One implies a reliability on the policy
established (the rules) while the other indicates a personal decision by a
dictator (the GM).  An answer by an agreed set of rules always reduces
discussions and fights. 

I find a character generation preferable to a character creation system.  I
find it imposes more on players and, ultimately, creates more interesting
characters.  This is one of the reason why I didn't like the TNE character
creation system (or more precisely a mix between creation and generation)
while I liked CT, MT and T4.

GURPS is not very good with tasks.  The 3d6 roll is cumbersome.  I
preferred the MT system that created a better "curve" (on this I can be
proven wrong)  I like the modifiers in MT.  I think GURPS has the same
problems with favorizing tasks that T4 does.  At least, MT favours skills. 
I have always preferred MT on this issue. 

As to tech, I don't think anything comes close to TNE (FF&S is a wonderful
book).  Yes I did not like the absence of thruster plates, on the other
hand, TNE had wonderful feel to it.  Everything was part of a whole (the
system for weapons, ships and vehicles) was ultimately incorporated.  The
optional tech created a wonderful opportunity to introduce other things
into the game.  While I did not like the background of TNE nor the absence
of thruster, I did like its handling of tech.  Let me just mention that I
do use GURPS for some things (Swashbuckler is an example: I am preparing
for a convention in Ottawa this weekend), but I still dislike many aspects
of it.  For example, GURPS handles armor almost like AD&D (armor teleports
you out of the way (I know this is not completely true, but this is
sufficiently close to the truth for the purpose of my demonstration), it
does not differienciate between penetration and damage.  That is one good
point for MT, TNE or T4.

Yes I will miss the Rebellion.  Norris, hero of the 5th frontier war, is
not the same as Norris, Keeper of the Flame (or the man who named himself
Archduke).  I will miss the Regency (even (once again repeating myself) if
I hated the Virus).

I will purchase GURPS traveller.  I will shamelessly rip the ideas out of
it and incorporate it in my own personal campaign.  I am looking forward to
GURPS Traveller.

One last thing, please stop SJG from substituting his Tech levels for
Travellers.

Daniel Poulin
pould@netcom.ca

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 08 Sep 97 20:09:40 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: Battle dress turtles  (was RE: Traveller-digest V1997  #1764

On 09/07/97 at 06:02 PM,  shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) said:

>> If one is moving, with heplar, then one is venting plasma, and will 
>> show up on IR like a neon sign.  Ditto for Image intensifiers or so 
>> forth, I presume (what does plasma look like?  I've never seen it IRL, 
>> just in bad SF movies).

>Sure you have! Ever see a neon bulb (*not* a fluorescent tube, which the
>Brits mis-call "neon"). That glowing gas is a plasma. The glow comes from
>the photons emitted as electrons recombine with the ionized atoms. 

>For that matter, the light from lightning is from ionized air (another
>plasma).

It's hard on the eyes, but the sun is a nice large ball of plasma.


Eris

- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: 09 Sep 1997 02:03:15 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Vehicle Page Fixed

I've fixed some bad links in our vehicle page:

http://www.interlog.com/~dmci104/GamingClub/Traveller/vehicles.html


Thanks to whoever emailed me with the error report.  Getting the exact error
messages what just what I needed to fix the problem quickly.  Want a job as a
beta tester?

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 21:41:58 -0500
From: David Reed <david@techrefuge.com>
Subject: The dread TIV virus (was RE: GURPS Traveller)

On Friday, September 05, 1997 19:26, GDWGAMES@aol.com wrote:
> Gurps Traveller is not really T5...I would call it T IV : )

Is that anything like HIV?  I suspect it shall be...  Traveller 
Immunodeficiency Syndrome.  ;-(  Anybody know what, if anything, happened 
with the alleged discussion between neoDGP under Sanger and 
IG/Sweatpea/FarFutures?  I think it died of SIDS.


BUT just to be fair to GURPS, I bought *cringe* both the basic GURPS book 
and Compendium I.  Gotta support my FLGS, since nobody else in town does. 
 Here's my Cr0.02 spin:

* The GURPS task system sux.  In a big way.  A possible failing of *any* 
would-be universal system...  Probably easy to tailor to whichever style 
you desire, though: space opera, hard corps, or whatever.

* The combat system is too full of exceptions, and "errata."  Lemme get 
this straight: I can DODGE an unlimited number of times in a ONE SECOND 
combat round?  Any attack type?  Er?  Can anyone say "Palladium"?

* The saving grace is the point-based, "quirk"-y but detailed character 
generation.  I've always been a fan of point-based systems, although 
they're rough for new players and the wembleys in the group who couldn't 
decide to have breakfast or not on Judgement Day.  It does seem to lack 
"professional" focus and direction, though.  Similar failing to 
Millenium's End and Babylon 5.  Although the ever-scrupulous GM will have 
to be on the look out for stray tendencies, phobias, and "powers", lest 
his game become Hellraiser MMMMM.

* SJG will InvalidateRect the BEST milieu Traveller ever had!  Bring back 
the Rebellion and Hard Times!!!

* The technology and combat system do not have a "Traveller" feel; but 
neither did TNE.  Even though T4 is a "change", it keeps the same 'feel' 
to it.  But, why did we stop calling it "combat armor" and confuse battle 
dress with combat armor?  Powered and unpowered battle dress?  eR?

No, wait!  I liked TNE!  I did.  Really.  Honest!  No, not the tweezers! 
 I even liked Virus...  D20 are kewler than six-siders...  Noooo! 
 *muffled screams*  </ramble>


Well, They (being who They always are) could've licensed it to ICE... 
 *shudder*  Anybody want a look at a publishing company that makes IG look 
good, pick up the any of the new Rolemaster stuff.  FWIW, I have bought 
multiple copies of everything IG, but I don't even *look* at anything by 
ICE if I can make my save versus [OGS ("Other" Gaming System) comment 
deleted.  -ed.].

> > This is of obvious interest to me and the other small GURPS cabal here
[snip]
> Would this "small GURPS cabal" please get in touch with me? I have a few
> questions of a technical nature to ask (and a sneaky suspicion that my
> work
> for the next few weeks is cut out for me).

If there's to be a cabal of any kind, I would like to offer my political 
consulting services thereto.  ;-)

> Loren Wiseman

Welcome back, Loren!  Whatcha been up to?
______________________________________________________________________

David Reed           | All wickedness is weakness: that plea therefore
                     | With God or Man will gain thee no remission.
david@techrefuge.com |                -John Milton, "Samson Agonistes"
______________________________________________________________________

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 08 Sep 1997 22:51:10 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: Visigoths, Vandals, and Cassandra Complex (was: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1789)

Phillip McGregor writes:

>>I've heard form a friend who writes for White Wolf that the straw that
>>broke the camels back came when WW was introducing Wraith at Gencon, and
>>all the people came up, looked it over, and asked when the GURPS version
>>would be released!
>
>And there is a reasonable chance of this happening with T4. What happens when,
>at Gencon 98 (or 99) someone walks up to the IG stand and does much the same?

   Romulus Augustus will be deposed, and the charade of the western
empire will be over.   

   Oops!  wait no, that's the Roman Empire, anyway same sort of thing. 
As scary as it may seem, Mr. McGregor and I agree on another point. 
This whole concept does not bode well for IG.

>Maybe I'm wrong. In any case, does it matter? So what if the much beloved (but
>as has been significantly pointed out, much officially and deliberately
>contradicted) by *some* "canon" for the Civil War and New Era are thrown out, if
>GTrav dominates (as I am theorising it will), then *it* will *become* the new
>Traveller "canon" in a way that TNE tried to but failed.

   Well that didn't last long...

   As has been pointed out in the past, TNE did not invalidate one bit
of storyline canon.  TNE could have done with more support in the form
of story ideas and essays that involved incorporating the Classic era
setting with TNE, but then those who liked the Classic era seemed far
too busy Dave Nilsen bashing, TNE bashing, and generally GDW bashing to
care to make the effort.

   I should have thought Mr. McGregor of all people would be concerned
about the issue of preserving the canon storyline.  I'm sorry I
misjudged him.  He is just like far too many American political Liberals
and Conservatives, who want to preserve their own favorite
Constitutional amendments and throw out the rest.  It doesn't work that
way--either you support the entirety of the canon storyline from first
contact between the Vilani and the Terrans up to and including all the
concepts in New Era (c.1203), or IMHO it would be far better to throw
the whole thing out and start over from scratch, unburdened by people
who remember how the story is supposed to be told.

Regards,

Harold

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 23:03:02 -0500
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: T4 and multiple design systems...

	My take on the various design systems (VDS vs. FF&S2, 3G3 vs.
FF&S2, etc) is simply that at any given tech level, various items of the
same type will perform differently, due to differences in quality, design,
manufacturing process, price point, distance into the product cycle, amount
of competition in the local market, local regulation, local taste, how
talented the designer was, and so forth.

	So basically, I don't have any problems with VDS vehicles being
pokier than FF&S2 vehicles.  If I want a quick&dirty vehicle, I'll fire up
CSC.  If I want a really high-performance, well-designed, and detail
vehicle, I'll take the time and use FF&S2.

	And I won't lose any sleep over it.



Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 08 Sep 1997 19:46:28 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Tech Levels

At 09:36 PM 9/8/97 +2, you wrote:
>On  7 Sep 97 at 18:49, Kenji Schwarz wrote:
>
>> There are, at least on Terra, TL-0 agrarian societies, as well as
>> TL1+ nomadic ones.  The lower end of the TL scale has always been
>> a little over-simplified for my taste.
>
>	Agreed. About nomads, I could easily imagine TL 10 nomadic tribes
>lumbering along in their big old freighters (held together by steel
>wire, Stik-Kits and prayer), buying, selling, bertering and stealing.

IMTU, the world Capon/Lunion has a large minority culture that follows lard
herd beast, harvesting them for meat and fur.  They're TL10, and live in
large ATVs and use both grav cycles and animal mounts to follow the basa herd.

My wife's character is from this culture.
- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 08 Sep 1997 19:48:23 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: The Gateway Book - Replies to Various Comments (LONG)

At 07:10 PM 9/8/97 -0500, you wrote:
>You wrote: 
>
>>Ah, the weapons in EA were designed using 3G3.
>
>The logic of which is simply astounding. . . 
>
>"Don't buy our products, they are no good.  Buy this other game 
>system's products."  Now I know. . . so back to scrounging used book 
>stores for TNE stuff.  At least it's self consistent--and where it's 
>not, it puts the 'errata' in the back of the book so I can build bigger 
>and better versions thereof.
>
>If you're going to bill something as 'The most realistic, comprehensive 
>vehicle and equipment design system ever published for science-fiction 
>role-playing' (from the back of T4 FF&S) then it ought to be able to 
>build the equipment in at least the supplements for that game. . . 

No to interupt a perfectly good rant, but 3G3 and EA were both designed by
Greg Porter, and both were released before FFS@ was written.
- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 22:51:51 -0500
From: "Kevin L. Kitchens" <peiprog@feist.com>
Subject: Solitaire Traveller???

This may be a FAQ, but not on any that I've seen.

Are there any Solitaire adventures for CT or other incarnations of 
Traveller?

The PC versions of MegaTraveller were not very good IMHO and I don't 
get much chance to get out, but love a good RPG.

Kevin
 The Perfect Game - http://www.peiprog.com/PerfectGame
========================================================
 Serving enthusiasts of computer baseball simulations
========================================================

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 08 Sep 1997 23:00:52 -0500
From: Sam Thomas <sinbad@dfw.net>
Subject: FF&S2-The Good, the Bad, and The Ugly

The Good:

Bryan Gibson artwork even though the artwork sometimes has been cropped out
his signature completely or nearly so.

Control types finally have descriptions for the control types.

Bruce's new and improved sensor system.

The cooking areas types, food types, and storage of such.

The effects of electronics and machine shops in game use.

The Bad:

Table of Maintenance Point Divisors is repeated too many times. Did IG use
it as a filler. Tables 11, 18, 23, 28, and 34. This table is sometimes on a
page twice, do they think that gearheads can not look up just one table on
one page?

Under Table 26: Rotor Assemblies
Where would a NOTOR (No tail rotor) fit in?

Under firearms design why was Liquid Propellants(ie Binary) omitted?

Thruster plates are listed as two different Tech Levels, page 11, Drives
paragraph listed as TL12, but page 65 Reactionless thrusters paragraph
lists them as TL 11.

With the new sensor system why are beam pointers still included?, ie both
the beam pointers and the new sensors determine the max firing range. Do
they cancel each other out?<G>

The text section on communicators does not explain about the number of
channels that each comm can have. It just refers you table 190-193.

The nuclear warhead table does not show an TL advancements ie a TL 9 and TL
15 10kt warhead are the same size. Also the nuclear warhead tables not show
the pen/damage ratings for the radii. 

The table 183: Computers stops at TL 15 but the table: 184 Computer Power
and Price goes to TL 21.

Also the Computer CP to CSC conversion is a MMT Black Book One "CANON
BUSTER" ie TL 5 culture can have a computer with a Computational Rating of
a FIVE!! 

MMT Black Book One, page 64 states the Computational Rating for a given TL
is TL-7(TL-6 for Imperial Intelligence).

Clearly the computers in the FF&S2 are not in sync with MMT at all, they
are still direct holdovers from FF&S1.

Also give up any hope of designing a one man X-Boat without using gross
amounts of "hand waving" the system as is, will not allow it. 

But I would like to find out if it can be done, so here is the criteria, a
snow cone shaped hull, jump six jump drives, two staterooms, minimal
kitchen area, minimal sensors, large TL 15 computers and databanks, and
life support for two for two weeks. Design all components at TL 15. Also
show you math work please.

The effects of jammers on sensors is not given, ie like -1.5 to
sensitivity, just mass and cost adjustments.

Pages 62 and 11: Under stealth paragraph, special effects of refers to page
72 under "sensors" but that page does not discuss the effects either.

Page 74: The effects of Reflected Signature Masking, and Thermal Masking
are not given but "Calculated Elsewhere"??? OK where?

Why do the controls types have to locked into the TL of the ship, my car
has a TL 8 IC engine ignition system but a TL5-6 Dash display ie
speedometer and *idiot* lights.

Under Table 163: Advanced Thrusters there is no minimum size just a minimum
thrust. 

Table 202: Active Tracker Targets has too few a number of targets, IRL the
SPY-1A can definitely track more than 20 targets. 

The same goes for the Table 200: Passive Tracker Targets, IRL a E-2 Hawkeye
can passively track more than 10 targets.

What is the power plant output tables in mw/m^3 per hour or what? I have
been unable to find that out in the power section.

The Ugly:

Front cover art! but I am not a fan of Foss art for Traveller.

The Proof reading or the lack there of.

The firearms design is over engineered for my tastes, the only thing
missing is tables for effects of temp and humidity on projectiles. My
Hornady Reloading Manual at least had that.<G>
- -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
(c)1997 Sam Thomas  |Email:sinbad@dfw.net|
Sinbad Sam, Owner and Operator of Sinbad Sam's Saloon 
Chief Weapons Designer For Reddkneck Arms and Munitions
- -----------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 08 Sep 1997 22:58:12 +0000
From: Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: [TML] Milieu 0 Campaign [Long]

Bill Rutherford wrote:
> 
> At 04:25 AM 9/8/97 EST, Ken wrote:

> >OK, I'm curious.  How did they explain away the LL=GG flub?
> >
> 
> Pp 141 - 143 provides an expanded ULP = Universal Law Profile, which
> expands upon and details law level to a seven digit number that replaces
> LL.  

Oh.  Well, it sounds OK--not enough to re-buy the book, mind you--but it
sounds OK.

From what you've said, though, I still prefer DGP's WBH.  They've got a
law profile that assigns different levels to different categories, like
the flub fix you've mentioned, but they do it in a simpler way.  You
don't have to relearn new law levels.  You just apply the same ones that
are already available to different categories--like Civil Law may be law
level 3 whereas Commercial Law may be law level 1, etc.

It sounds like a very similar system to DGP's, but DGP, as usual, does
it better.

Kenneth.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 21:55:33 -0800
From: Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca>
Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller

>>TNE: Thruster plates never existed
>
>Not true. FF&S has provisions for those referees who want to keep thrusters
>in their campaigns.

That is correct. However, they were specifically an alternate rule and
never existed in the canon Imperial campaign.

>>1: This is how it should have been all along.
>
>I think you should have put an "IMO" in front of that statement, don't you?

Well, how about if I retract it altogether? The remark was an unkind swipe
against Harold's posting of what should be considered before saying "This
is how it should have been all along". There is already too much mindless
flaming against TNE and I am embarassed to contribute to it. My CT-campaign
ignored TNE and I think anyone with a TNE campaign can safely ignore GURPS
Traveller. Claiming that one setting is "right" and another is "wrong" is
immature and I apologise for giving that impression.

>>2: I lose as little sleep over my campaign setting "becoming invalidated"
>>as I do over the TL 14 vacc suits in Anomalies.
>
>I find both disconcerting.

I only meant that I use what fits in my setting and ignore the rest. Of
course it is bad for the game itself if published canon contrdicts itself;
it tends to damage the sense of realism and makes different referees'
campaigns incompatible. While this is not a concern in a single camplaign,
I did not mean that it doesn't matter for the game as a whole.

Next time I will re-read my wise-ass replies before posting. I apologise
for what I intended to be a witty remark to come off so hostile.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 00:43:10 -0500 (CDT)
From: jatkins6@ix.netcom.com (John Atkinson)
Subject: Re: The Gateway Book - Replies to Various Comments (LONG)

You wrote: 

>Originally, 3G3 was _supposed_ to be the weapons design system for T4, but
>somewhere alonng the increasingly chaotic course that IG has taken, we've
>ended up with several design systems, all allegedly canon.

This is giving me a headache.  I would ask why, but I know I won't get 
an answer that makes sense outside of 'certain people like money more 
than they give a flying fuck about the customers'.  

>This is particularly sad, because I _like_ FFS and FFS2, indeed the whole
>idea of one source for designing everything. QSDS and SSDS are actually
>relatively easy to fix to conform with FFS2. 

I love FFS, and FFS2 has some cool ideas (How can one not love a book 
that makes the 'Pigs in space, OK, but cows in space??' joke?).  But 
it's essentially pretty screwed up that we have three design sequences 
running around that are no closer than kissing cousins (which means a 
different thing to the rest of us than it does to you West Virginians.  
Although why am I worried?   What West Virginian owns a computor?)

>That said, FFS2 is a vast improvement over FFS, particularly for wepons
>design.

In what way?

John M. Atkinson

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 01:03:05 -0500
From: David Reed <david@techrefuge.com>
Subject: In sickness and in hell... (was RE: Thoughts on roleplaying)

On Monday, September 08, 1997 01:16, D.Moodie wrote:
>
> You'd consider playing Diablo? Are you SICK?!?!

Must be...  I wasted enough of my life to beat the game, spend some time 
on the Battle.net, and enhance my marriage by ambushing my wife in Hell. 
 ;-)

Why do you ask?
______________________________________________________________________

David Reed           | All wickedness is weakness: that plea therefore
                     | With God or Man will gain thee no remission.
david@techrefuge.com |                -John Milton, "Samson Agonistes"
______________________________________________________________________

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1794
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Tuesday, September 9 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1795



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: The Gateway Book - Replies to Various Comments (LONG)
Re: Old Cthuluhu!  Muhahahahahaaaa! (was: Re: GURPS Trav (T-5?))
RE: Thoughts on roleplaying
Re: CT, MT, TNE, T4 vs GURPS, revisited (LONG)
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1794
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1793
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1793
GURPS Traveller and the Rebellion
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1792
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1794

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 01:04:52 -0500 (CDT)
From: jatkins6@ix.netcom.com (John Atkinson)
Subject: Re: The Gateway Book - Replies to Various Comments (LONG)

You wrote: 

>No to interupt a perfectly good rant, but 3G3 and EA were both designed by
>Greg Porter, and both were released before FFS@ was written.

I don't really follow 'industry personalities' (they don't follow me, 
why should I follow them?) but I can tell the difference between a 
product with a big honkin' 'T4 Marc Miller's Traveller' on the top and 
one without.  If 'they' (meaning the yammerhead who made this winner of 
a decision) intended for 3G3 to be the official small arms sequence, 
then why in God's name would they put a totally different design 
sequence in the book intended as the 'official' equipment design book?  
Why not just say "buy friggin' 3G3 if you want to design sick small 
arms like a full-auto 20mm ATR.[1]"??? 

John M. Atkinson

[1]Yes, I do own a complete regiment of Command Decision Finns, why do you ask??[2]
[2]If the above isn't clue enough, look up 'Lahti ATR' in any good 
reference book on the Continuation War.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 08 Sep 1997 22:05:44 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Re: Old Cthuluhu!  Muhahahahahaaaa! (was: Re: GURPS Trav (T-5?))

Glenn M. Goffin wrote
> 
> > Date: Sat, 06 Sep 1997 04:53:12 -0800
> > From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
> 
> > know about the great Great Cthulhu plush.  (I will admit that I am
> > somewhat frustrated by the inability of the plush to cause SAN loses).
> 
> How do you know that you're not taking SAN losses every time you look at
> it?  Go get some help.

The voices assure me I am perfectly normal and anyone who says otherwise
is part of one of the plots against me.  I will thwart your plot to
diminish my reputation by pretending to be concerned for me. I know that
it is just part of your insidious plan. :) 

- -- 
 pnewman@alaska.net	Peter Newman 
- --------------------------------------------------------------
"I have been nothing but compassionate and understanding. I mean, all
you had to do was to admit you were wrong and I was right and everything
would've been fine." - Ivanova to Winters in Babylon5: "Divided
Loyalties"

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 01:21:51 -0500
From: David Reed <david@techrefuge.com>
Subject: RE: Thoughts on roleplaying

On Monday, September 08, 1997 08:44, Derek Wildstar wrote:

> If anything, I feel that it's easier to "get into" character, because
> there are fewer distractions.  It's a lot easier to suspend disbelief and
> think of the other participants as half-elven enchantresses, Vargr, or [snip]
> of that half-elven enchantress scratches his beard and asks you to pass the
> pretzels).

*rofl*  Do you have something against beards?  Hmmm?  (Just adding to the 
paranoia that there's too much *hate* on the TML; when did the Clintons 
and Rodney King joing us anyway?  I'm all for NOT getting along.  It's 
some much more fun!)

> I've toyed with the idea of setting up a Traveller MU* (either MUCK or

I've had some experience with Diku/ROM and MUD++ (I was *supposed* to get 
server time to do a Dark Conspiracy mud, but Rob disappeared for a year or 
so, and I've given up on Tantalus taking a direct action on anything.) and 
if anything, it's more trouble than it's worth to port existing code.  I 
don't have any xp with LP or mucky-moo, so perhaps lib-based deals might 
work better.

> Periodically, the referee would disconnect the Azhanti's exits from the rest
> of the database (a week in "jumpspace"), and a week later connect them to
> a new destination system for exploring and adventuring.  After a suitably
> long time in the system (during which time the referee would be creating the
> next destination), the ship could jump again.

[Line shrinkage required on client emailer.  -ed.]

Do you realize the amount of time involved in creating an entirely NEW 
world every week?  Or even a Mostly New World(tm)?  Having tried RAD area 
development for ROM with MZF (Make Zones Fast), it gets tedious in a BIG 
hurry.  Especially with the detail and variety that a sci-fi audience 
comes to expect.  "Those thar durn 'fantastic' players might be happy with 
a zillion little koboldythingies on every level, but once I kill the 
zargobeastimobile, I don' wanna see it no mo'."

> Unfortunately, I don't have the time (or the server hardware) to try
> this
> experiment.  It would be interesting, though.

I have the server, no time.  ;-(  Trying to drum up builders and coders in 
the current mud economy on the 'net right now is like trying to get folks 
to pan gold for you in the stream; everyone thinks he can do it on his 
own...

> There's a reason for trying a MUCK - I've seen code for a "terraform" system
> for MUCKs.  This is an ingenious program for allowing the referee to define
> an entire planet (by creating a planetary map).  The players can then enter
> the system and explore it, down to the point of traversing terrain on the
> surface and encountering various special features coded into the map.

Could reduce development time if it were suitably GUI, but...  Hey! 
 Cookies!  Where's this code?  Any chance it could be ported as a 
cartography program?  I haven't found one for Trav that either: 1) I can 
afford, 2) has any features whatsoever, 3) exists as anything but 
vaporware.

Speaking of the ultimate vaporware, anyone out there look at SkipOS yet? 
 Heh.
______________________________________________________________________

David Reed           | All wickedness is weakness: that plea therefore
                     | With God or Man will gain thee no remission.
david@techrefuge.com |                -John Milton, "Samson Agonistes"
______________________________________________________________________

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 09 Sep 1997 00:40:23 PDT
From: "Charles Li" <chaslimd@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: CT, MT, TNE, T4 vs GURPS, revisited (LONG)

>From owner-traveller@phaser.showcase.mpgn.com Mon Sep  8 
>it and incorporate it in my own personal campaign.  I am looking 
forward to
>GURPS Traveller.
>
>One last thing, please stop SJG from substituting his Tech levels for
>Travellers.
>
>Daniel Poulin
>pould@netcom.ca

  If SJG did that, it wuldn't conform to GURPS.  Listen, its going to 
happen, and a good portion of us dedicated Traveller players are 
embracing it while others a rejecting it from every angle possible 
including misinterpretation. No side is "right" or wrong... I am just as 
dedicated (1979) a Traveller PLAYER as any one of you, and I don't care 
if I run the risk of being labelled by the rabid faction of the TM 
(since I will likely adopt to GURPS Traveller due to my belief in GURPS 
as a more matured system, not taking anything away from what will be 
T4.1).   For every individual who shirks at GURPS, there will be someone 
who thinks its the best thing since the round wheel.  The TML may reject 
it as heresy, but let SJG do what it will, because Marc Miller and 
IG/Sweetpea have already entrusted them with Traveller's good name. 
    Its up to them now to run with the ball...  while we are still 
holding the ball for T4.1

ChasLiMD@hotmail.com


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 17:48:03 +1000 (EST)
From: "D.Moodie" <dmoodie@st.nepean.uws.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1794

>> You'd consider playing Diablo? Are you SICK?!?!

> Must be...  I wasted enough of my life to beat the game, spend some time
> on the Battle.net, and enhance my marriage by ambushing my wife in Hell.
> ;-)

> Why do you ask?

Because 'Diablo' put Computer Role Playing back 10 years and turned it
into a depth-free hack'n'slash with no NPC interaction, an awful spell
system and an appaling character system.

Get a hold of a game called 'Legend' or 'Worlds of Legend: Son of the
Empire' (excuse the primitive VGA graphics), or even 'Ultima 8' (IMHO the
worst Ultima) and just see how primitive Diablo is...

Nothing personal of course (if I wanted to be personal I'd talk about
TNE, Task systems, Canon or GURPS), I just HATE Diablo >:(

 							D.Moodie

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 09 Sep 1997 04:00:44 EDT
From: lugh1@juno.com
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1793

	I have been playing traveller for ten years now and I have seen
CT MT TNE and T4 and IMHO T4 is the best system so far , but maybe I am
missing some huge error in the system . I like T4 and asside from the
crappy aliens in AA I want to see more stuff , more campaign books and
more suppliments . as for the gurps deal I like the idea of this but the
urps system is so slow and lends itself to abuse by cheeseball players
that I would only purchase gurps stuff for the backround material .

CT .. good system but dated
MT .. didn't like the rebelion background , pretty good system though 
TNE .. I liked the background and I would like to see a campaign book
useing the TNE background for T4 . the T2000 rules are good excepting
combat the idea of a pistol doing 1D6 dmg to a person with 54 points in
the chest is ludicrous , and slow ..
T4 .. the best system so far IMHO ...I like the pocket empires book alot
.

what IG needs is to reprint the CT material for T4 asap

thank you for your time


jim mckee 

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 09 Sep 1997 04:00:44 EDT
From: lugh1@juno.com
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1793

douge berry , after reading your response and usage of the example of the
british I have to agree in essance . however someone please explain how
any nation could have sealed its borders dureing WWIII espeasealy a
central nation like france . Look at WW1 and WW2 , I feel that thins
would pretty much go the same in WW3 ,

chip 

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 18:47:45 +1000 (EST)
From: "Barry / Michael James (COM)" <m.barry@student.canberra.edu.au>
Subject: GURPS Traveller and the Rebellion

GURPS Traveller: Good. 
GURPS Traveller without Rebellion: Not So Good, but still acceptable. 
GURPS Traveller in Hard Times: Better. 
GURPS Traveller in 1131, no Virus: Perfect! 
Me go sleep now. 

=========================================================
m.barry@student.canberra.edu.au ------ preferred address
mbarry@pcug.org.au              ------ alternative address

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 09 Sep 1997 09:06:53 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1792

On Mon, 8 Sep 1997 14:23:17 -0400, you wrote:

>Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 18:20:38 +0200 (METDST)
>From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
>Subject: Re: Plague of Duskir & Canon
>
>Phillip McGregor writes:
>>>From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>

<stuff on problems with canon snipped>

>Considering the number of different people involved and the amount of material 
>that has been produced, I think that until the recent controversial T4
>material things weren't all that bad. It is, I think, impossible for anyone
>to keep everything straight when so many people work on something for so many
>years, but that dosen't mean one shouldn't try as hard as possible to
>eliminate mistakes. Just the opposite, in fact.

It's called "continuity" and they do it (mostly) pretty successfully in ongoing
TV series and movies. Everyone who wants to write something for the show is
given a special writer's guideline book that has all the official "canon" for
said show in it -- and this is (in theory) kept constantly updated.

Seems to me that it wouldn't have been all that hard to do something like that.
Or, at the very least, for the author(s) to reject or rewrite those parts of
material they publsihed or licensed that did not mesh with "canon". But they
didn't, so we have this confused situation -- and, anyway, part of the reason
for the confusion is undoubtedly that the author(s) have, over the years,
modified their ideas about "canon" based on new information (whether completely
new or simply new to them) -- and that includes new technology as much as a
better understanding (one presumes) of historical processes. After all, the GDW
was first and foremost a Wargame design company when it started (as I well know,
having bought my first GDW wargame in the early 70's, as soon as they started
up, in fact).
  
>>and since it is (when you consider it closely) the Third Imperium's
>>*official* version of events that (in this case) 
>
>The  two sources I have for the Plague of Duskir are the Solomani-viewpoint
>piece in _Rats&Cats_ and the authorial-voice piece in TD#20. Is there an 
>entry in _Imperial Encyclopedia_ too? (I'll check that myself when I get
>home).

I don't think there is much of an entry (if any at all) in II. As for the
allegedly Solomani viewpoint one, well, like I said -- 1) 2000 years in the past
and, 2) "other losses" misinterpretation. To which can be added 3) gross
exaggeration (see below) and 4) DGP doing stuff that may or may not have really
been what GDW wanted/expected (like the "Sparklers" or "Dazzlers" that people
have occasionally mentioned were in their very last Digests).

>>happened thousands of years before, and before the Long Night as well, then 
>>you can see that the validity of *anything* that is canon can *always* be 
>>called into doubt *if* there is a more plausible explanation.
>
>I don't care a stuffed owl for how many years ago it is. If I, a properly
>authorized referee (I bought the books, that makes me authorized ;-), is
>informed of a fact by the creators of the game background, then that fact
>should stay a fact. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the historical
>process we know of in the real world. This history is being created, not
>observed and recorded.

But, of course, this is wishful thinking. Traveller "canon" has always been
mutable at best. And that's whether its tech or history. And look at the
Santanocheev affair -- everyone thinks (officially) that he's hot stuff because
of his careful media management, but he's (allegedly -- according to Norris) a
total incompetent. In 2000 years time (from then) someone could come across the
post Virus remnants (OK, yeah, I know the Regency wasn't affected -- but the
*rest* of the Imperium *was*, so assume it happened there) of what passes for
the records of the period and finds only the bits telling what a great job
Santanocheev was doing? He immediately writes a book on this "great man" -- and
naysayers from what was once the Regency would have a hard time proving anything
different amongst some elements of the populace. Voila, a *factoid* is born!

>>>is established as a fact, a sort of reverse burden of proof applies. In
>>>order to reject a canonical fact it must be completely implausible, not just
>>>more implausible than some other possibility. After all, historically, some 
>>>pretty long shots have come off once in a while.
>> 
>>So, you still believe in Solar Powered multiple JDrives (Annic Nova) 
>
>Advanced super-science by an unknown race. Yep. That I'll accept. There is
>another example of such a ship in _Secret of the Ancients_ (well, it carried
>around a lifetime supply of fuel in a pocket universe. Perhaps the Annic
>Nova does the same.)

Unfortunately Annic Nova was simply from the Julian Protectorate. And the JP is
lower in Tech than even average Imperial in 1100. The possibilities were
(presumably) too unsettling of what the designers *later* decided they wanted,
so they conveniently ignored it thereafter. But Annic Nova was an official GDW
publication in the 3 little black book days!

>>and Jump Torpedoes (Leviathan?). 
>
>I guess you don't recall that I designed a workable jump torpedo the last
>time that particular bit of canon was discussed.

Was it under 10 tons in displacement mass? Considering that MTrav and TNE both
disallow JDrive capable vessels under 100 tons. And, if *you* remember, I also
suggested a way that such a limitation could be worked around the last time such
an argument was raised. But (AFAIR) the canoneers were up in arms against any
such change (OK, OK, with *you* as an exception, granted).

>>They were *canon* in their day. 
>
>They still are as far as I am concerned. But I'll agree with your basic
>point. Keeping canon straight is important IMO, but it is not the only
>important thing. Internal consistency and playability are even more
>important. 

But they *aren't*, officially! So, you accept the parts of canon that you like
and reject those that you don't like -- and you accept *official* revisions to
canon if you like them, but reject them if you don't? Look, I'm not objecting to
that sort of position -- its where *I'm* coming from myself. But, like they say,
what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander!

>>And you accept the revisionistic nature of claims about the nature of TL16
>>Darrian tech in the Regency Handbook. 
>
>No, I don't. That is just exactly an example of what I don't like to see.
>It invalidate previously published material without adding anything
>important to compensate.

See above. Gateway does the same. Which is where the argument started.

>>No. Sure. But just because some Vilani nationalist claims that the PoD was a
>>megaplague several thousand years later, on ghu knows what sort of evidence 
>>that still exists, do we believe him?
>
>Of course not. But if one of the creators of the game background states that
>that's the way it is, then we should take him seriously. And so should every
>later creator.

But the games creators have contradicted themselves over and over in important
areas. What it boils down to is that *you* agree with them when it suits your
purposes and *disagree* with them when it doesn't. Fine, that's *exactly* what I
am doing -- it's just that *my* way of looking at these things doesn't agree
with yours (or "canon"), but *yours* doesn't necessarily do so either!

>>Think of the controversy (ongoing) of where all the people went after the
>>collapse of the Roman Empire in the west.
>
>Irrelevant. Historians are trying their best to figure out one immutable
>set of happenings. (Just because we don't know what direction one tribe
>went dosen't meant that it took more than one. We may never know the truth,
>but there is one). The game creators are trying to work out a background
>for the game. The two situations cannot be compared at all.

What I am trying to say -- and, OK, you reject the idea ... fine, I can live
with it -- is that it is obvious that the authors have revised canon in all
sorts of areas on an ongoing basis to suit their changing world view. Since the
Imperium is obviously modelled on the Roman Empire, perhaps the PoD was modelled
on the plagues that accompanied the historical empire's collapse. If we accept
that Gateway is an "official" product, then we need to allow for its effects on
*canon* as well. Also, see notes below on numbers of dead re PoD anyway.

>>In that sense, even Traveller "canon" ... ESPECIALLY when it makes comments 
>>on events far in the past ... is *very* mutable. 
>
>There is no "far in the past" when we're talking about something written 5
>or 10 years ago.

And, of course, *nothing* about Traveller has been changed since the Traveller
#1 release in 1977 or so? Obviously not so! It's just that you seem to prefer
not to accept some of those changes, while accepting others. Like I said, fine,
I have no problem with it -- but allow *me* to do the same! Fair's fair!

>>You accept Annic Nova was "canon" and that "Leviathan" was canon? 
>
>Just those two examples I accept, but I have to admit that there are 
>problems with the early CT publications. Quite understandable, of course.
>GDW was just piecing together the first tentative framework and there are
>a number of things that can't be true (see my sig. for an example). But
>I never claimed that canon should be adhered to if it was impossible. I
>just say that a less propably, but still possible, canonical fact should
>be preferred to a more propable, but non-canonical fact.  

So it boils down to "I accept some things that suit me and reject others." Like
I said, I can live with it.

>*IF* Gateway is canonical (and IG allowed it to be republished with no change 
>>in this important aspect, so they had a chance to bring it into line if they 
>>had wanted, and only a modest change would have been needed to do so), 
>
>Come on! You can't seriously mean to argue that the fact that IG didn't
>change anything in "Gateway" implies that they even thought about this
>question for one tiny moment!?

I wouldn't claim that IG has ever thought about *anything* <grin>. However, what
parts of what IG have published *are* canon, then? I'm pretty certain that if we
got down to cases we'd find a lot that we could agree *were* canon, a lot that
we could agree "weren't* canon, and a whole h*ll of a lot that we'd argue over.
Which of us would be right? You'd say "me" and *I'd* disagree, naturally!

>>>No, but so what? The Amerindians weren't nearly as different from the 
>>>Europeans as we know the Vilani are from Terrans.
>> 
>>And, assuming that they had had them at the time, modern antibiotics would 
>>have KO'ed any bacterial diseases that the Amerindians may have picked up 
>>from the invaders. 
>
>Always provided that those bacterial diseases haven't adapted to  those
>modern antbiotics.

But those damn bacteria would still be dangerous to Terrans -- so the *Terrans*
would be dying from the diseases if they were resistant to the current
antibiotics as of the Interstellar Wars. Not as many as the Vilani (and it seems
that there weren't many of them, in percentage terms, anyway), but enough to
warrant ongoing research into improved versions -- *JUST AS IS THE CASE AT
PRESENT*. In other words, it's ridiculous to make this claim *because the
Terrans have a need for the antibiotics as well."

>And you're still missing it too. The diseases that kills the Vilani are not
>dangerous to the Terrans, so they don't treat them.
>
>>Even though Penicillin is now reduced in effectiveness, the diseases that it
>>treated are now treatable with different antibiotics, and there is an ongoing
>>race to develop new antibiotics to replace these newer ones. Unless *all*
>>diseases develop into something like VRE (antibiotic resistant golden staph),
>
>It dosen't have to be all of them, just some of them.

And those diseases are going to be a problem for Terrans as well.

>>in which case the Terrans will have been ravaged by disease as much as the 
>>Vilani,
>
>I hope I manage to state it clearly enough this time: _The diseases that 
>killed the Vilani were not dangerous to the Terrans_.

You know this for a fact? You know exactly *what* diseases constituted the PoD?
I don't think it actually details this *anywhere*. In other words, *in your
opinion* this is the case, but you don't have any solid facts for this -- OK,
*in my opinion* it is *not* the case, and I have just as many facts backing my
opinion up!

>>As I said, this isn't the way it works. Unless you posit that the WD, SWD and
>>SCWD have no effect on Terrans for many diseases as well, and this is not the
>>case.
>
>Yes, that is exactly what is claimed by the canonical references. That the
>Vilani were killed by diseases that didn't affect the Terrans. Digestive
>bacteria are even mentioned as one of the components.

Assuming that this is true, then so what? Digestive bacteria, as I have pointed
out *are* affected by available antibiotics and have not become resistant.
>>Remember, the Terrans had been fighting (and had occupied) Vilani worlds for
>>hundreds of years before the collapse. 
>
>The Plague of Duskir was long before the collapse. TD#20 says that the most
>famous of these diseases, the Plague of Duskir, occurred in the wake of
>advancing Solomani troops. It also refer to other infections brought by
>Terran PoWs and by Solomani settlers._Rats&Cats_ claim that the PoD came
>from the settlers. But in any case it was something that happened early on.

Which makes it even less likely that the Terrans would be unprepared. And, of
course, the PoD was the worst -- and its death rates were ridiculously low!

>>They *KNEW* what was likely to happen from this experience -- and it still 
>>boils down to the requirement that you believe the Terrans and Terran 
>>Military *DELIBERATELY* allowed the PoD to happen by making no preparations. 
>>There is no possible *economic* reason to allow this, 
>
>Actually, there is. Transporting wealth between worlds takes cargo space. It
>is actually much better for a Terran immigrant to  be able to take over an
>empty appartment and a vacant job than to start with just what he could
>carry along with him on the trip. (Actually, many Terrans propably stole
>(in the most legal way possibly, of course) what they needed to establish
>themselves. If their Vilani victims resisted that actively, getting rid of
>some of them could be an attractive option. It's a vile idea, but people
>have an amazing ability to rationalize vile ideas. 

This simply doesn't make sense. Economically or morally.

>>No, I'm not saying it didn't happen at all. Its even possible that on some
>>planets it was quite bad. However, overall, I would expect that it would be
>>lucky if 3-5% of the population died -- 
>
>On most planets you may well be right, but it is said that on some planets 
>(ie. more than one) the deaths killed off enough Vilani to leave the Terran 
>immigrants in the majority. I should think that this would be on planets
>close to Terra, where the logistics of space travel would allow the Terrans
>to immigrate in larger than average numbers. This would both introduce more
>disease carriers and mean that fewer Vilani need to die before the Terrans
>become the majority.

Actually, it is unlikely that your guess is correct. These planets would be
closer to help, assuming that it is really all that difficult to program a
factory computer to produce the machinery to produce antibiotics and antivirals.
 

>>No, what I have been *meaning* to say all along (and thought I *was* saying
>>:-{ was that the PoD was vastly overrated ... which seems to me to be "It 
>>happened, but not quite that way."
>
>We seem to be approaching a consensus ;-)

At last!

>>>(As an aside, this works out at an average of 500,000+ people per planet.
>>>Undoubtedly there were planets with a lot more than the average number of
>>>deaths, but if the plagues really did leave Solomani immigrants as the
>>>majority on some planets, then many Vilani planets must have had
>>>populations down in the 10s of millions; something I've argued for before.)
>> 
>>A billion people in an empire of 10000 worlds! This is a "massive" die off? 
>
>It is certainly enough to create the story of the terrible Plague of Duskir
>that killed off many billions. I'm not opposed to some flexibility in
>interpreting the viewpoint writing: the library data and articles of the Year 
>1100. I just insist that there be some reason for the story. After all, 
>Holocaust revisionists wouldn't be claiming that the Holocaust never happened 
>if it hadn't happened, now would they ;-). Secondly, I insist that the 
>authorial statements remain unchanged (if at all possible).

Sorry, if we assume that this sort of thing was spread out wherever the Terrans
went, the worlds that suffered are likely to have been the hi-pop worlds. Given
that the population of the ZS was probably comparable to that of the 3I (say
between 1/3 and 1/2 ... though I personally suspect it would be closer to 2/3),
then we have a situation where the 10000 worlds (I worked this out a while ago)
something on the order of 300 to 500 billion people, mostly concentrated on the
hi-pop worlds. So we have 1 billion people die in the PoD. That's 0.2 to 0.33%
of the ZS's population. The Spanish Flu killed 20 million or so (records are
understandably sketchy for the less advanced parts of the world) and is the
worst plague *ever* ... the world population was around 1.2 billion at the time,
which means that *it* killed a bit over 1.5% of world population. How many
people of the "man in the street" sort have even heard of it these days? Or know
how many died? Or know how relatively insignificant it was?

Sorry, if all the PoD did was to kill off a 1/2% or less of the ZS's population,
then it seems the whole thing *has* to be seen as propaganda on the part of
*someone*.
 
>>The worst plague in human history -- the Spanish Flu at the end of WW1 -- 
>>was worse than this! 
>
>It killed over a billion people?

No, it killed a larger *percentage* of people. To have the same effect on the
population of the ZS, you would have to have it kill 5-8 billion people. And
even then, like I said, who remembers the Spanish Flu?

>>Is *this* what we've been arguing about? It sounds more and more like a 
>>historical misinterpretation of an "Other Losses" or collapse of population
>>after collapse of Roman Empire kind ... some minor thing being blown out of 
>>all proportion!
>
>You're entitled to your opinion, of course, but I for one believe that the
>premature death of a billion people is worthy of at least a foot-note in
>history... ;-)

About as big a one as the Spanish Flu is. Which is to say, sweet damn all for
practical purposes. *UNLESS* someone connected with it has an axe of some sort
to grind!

>>>That's just not true. If the present day Vilani are descended from the part
>>>of their predecessors that were stronger than the norm, then it is perfectly
>>>plausible that they are stronger too. And, of course, there has been
>>>considerable contact with Terrans _since_ the Plague.
>> 
>>But the argument is that all Vilani had an immune system that had atrophied 
>>for 250,000 or more years in the absence of contact with Terran disease 
>>organs (something I dispute, but you don't). Thus, if you are arguing a 
>>statistical quirk that means some Vilani have a useful immune response, 
>
>What's so quirky about assuming that the Vilani immune system strengths
>follow a bell curve?

So we have around 99% or so resistant, as less than 1% died? Seems like,
statistically speaking, the Vilani immune system was essentially the same as far
as effectiveness goes ... *or* that Terran medical tech was vastly successful in
treating them, much more so than anyone gives them credit for, for whatever
reason.

>>we wouldn't be talking a mere 500,000 per planet dying, we would be talking 
>>perhaps a 90% or more die back. 
>
>This is sheer hasty thinking. The bell curve can be centered anywhere we
>want in order to create the history we want.

OK, so its centered on a 99% survival rate!

Even if the ZS populace was only 1/10th of Milieu 0 populace, then its still 100
billion, and 1 billion dead is still only 1% ... and an immunity rate of 99%!
Looks more and more like the PoD was and is a complete beat up, eh?

>>You will probably have Spanish Flu equivalents (the Spanish Flu wiped out as 
>>many people as WW1, but more evenly spread -- perhaps 1.5% of the world 
>>population at the time, all in about 12-18 months) ... nasty, but not 100% 
>>lethal in weeks.
>
>Possibly the "Gateway" disease is a freak even by Terran standards? In any
>case, if "Gateway" takes place in Milieu 0, then it is irrelevant that the
>humans involved are Vilani. By this time they must have much the same
>resistance as any Solomani.

No disease works that way. None. Even Pneumonic Plague was only as lethal as it
was because of the cramped and unhygienic living conditions of the Middle Ages.
If a single person with the Flu sneezes, how many people in a room get it? And
aerosol is just about the best way of spreading disease. It's not 100%, not even
close. And since the Vilani immune system is, based on figures you have
provided, no more than 1% less effective than the Terran one, well, it seems
that it simply cannot spread as effectively or as fast.

>>OK, its some Solomani academic who is pushing an "Other Losses" theory that, 
>>for its own reasons, the 3I is prepared to support. Probably the Solomani 
>>themselves think the guy is a crackpot -- so what is the 3I's reason for 
>>this? Seems pretty obvious -- they want to demonise the Solomani, which 
>>goes great with the reconquest of Earth!
>
>That one went completely by me. Can you rephrase it? I don't get your point
>at all.

The 3I reconquered earth -- and it's always a good idea to demonise the enemy,
it makes it easier to kill. Most well educated people don't really like killing
other people they have every reason to think are poor saps in just the same fix
they are -- and hesitation can be fatal. So governments involved differentiate
the enemy by making them seem a) vile and evil or b) subhuman -- so the 3I hyped
up its troops by making these claims about the Solomani (and, yes, I know that
the 3I traces its legitimacy from the RoM ... this sort of idiocy doesn't have
to make sense.)

Phil 

- ---------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU)
Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)
Designer, Standard Role Playing (PGD)

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 09 Sep 1997 09:21:27 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1794

On Tue, 9 Sep 1997 02:27:18 -0400, you wrote:

>Date: Mon, 08 Sep 1997 22:51:10 -0400
>From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
>Subject: Visigoths, Vandals, and Cassandra Complex (was: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1789)
>
>Phillip McGregor writes:
>
>>>I've heard form a friend who writes for White Wolf that the straw that
>>>broke the camels back came when WW was introducing Wraith at Gencon, and
>>>all the people came up, looked it over, and asked when the GURPS version
>>>would be released!
>>
>>And there is a reasonable chance of this happening with T4. What happens when,
>>at Gencon 98 (or 99) someone walks up to the IG stand and does much the same?
>
>   Romulus Augustus will be deposed, and the charade of the western
>empire will be over.   

I'll have you know that all we did was *restore* the rightful (eastern)
emperor's authority under a new Consul!

>   Oops!  wait no, that's the Roman Empire, anyway same sort of thing. 
>As scary as it may seem, Mr. McGregor and I agree on another point. 
>This whole concept does not bode well for IG.

Why is it scary? Surely I'm not *that* much of a bogey-man ... and I don't even
have (too many) tendrils on my head, either!

>>Maybe I'm wrong. In any case, does it matter? So what if the much beloved (but
>>as has been significantly pointed out, much officially and deliberately
>>contradicted) by *some* "canon" for the Civil War and New Era are thrown out, if
>>GTrav dominates (as I am theorising it will), then *it* will *become* the new
>>Traveller "canon" in a way that TNE tried to but failed.
>
>   Well that didn't last long...
>
>   As has been pointed out in the past, TNE did not invalidate one bit
>of storyline canon.  TNE could have done with more support in the form
>of story ideas and essays that involved incorporating the Classic era
>setting with TNE, but then those who liked the Classic era seemed far
>too busy Dave Nilsen bashing, TNE bashing, and generally GDW bashing to
>care to make the effort.

I'm not *necessarily* bashing TNE (though, believe me, I *could*!) I'm simply
pointing out what seems to be obvious. GDW went bust, and with it, effectively,
TNE and Virus. IG promised, at some unspecified future date, to do some sort of
TNE background tie-up ... but, let's get real here, do you *seriously* believe
that IG has enough of a clue to last much longer before going belly up? Even if
there was going to be *no* GURPS Traveller? And with GURPS Traveller as
competition, I'd say its had it in no more than 18 months or so *unless* they
finally *do* get a clue ... and they haven't shown a sign of it yet.

You've seen all the comments about how game stores are shunning IG products
unless they have been specifically ordered by customers? Don't look good.

As much as you have a right to like TNE, all I'm saying is that, if things
continue the way we can reasonably assume that they will based on IG's and SJG's
relevant track records to date, then GURPS Traveller will supplant IG's T4.
Sure, we maybe won't like the alternative history -- and I for one always liked
the *history* of MTrav, I just loathed the *game system* that came with it --
but we simply won't have a say. Unless Steve gets the rights to do all the old
stuff in the event of IG's demise ... of course, look on the bright side, as
someone rightly noted, SJG are in the business to make a profit and, if they end
up being the only game in town, then it seems reasonably certain that they will
see the potential market in a TNE/MTrav and Milieu 0 tie-up series and do them
as well. So, I suspect, even if we end up with GTrav being the "one, true, Trav"
you'll almost certainly get more RefCol/Regency stuff *eventually* ... and if
you're good enough, you can probably convince SJ to let you write it (if and
when).

>   I should have thought Mr. McGregor of all people would be concerned
>about the issue of preserving the canon storyline.  I'm sorry I
>misjudged him.  He is just like far too many American political Liberals
>and Conservatives, who want to preserve their own favorite
>Constitutional amendments and throw out the rest.  It doesn't work that

Nope, I'm like most *AUSTRALIAN* Liberals (i.e. Conservatives) and Socialists
(i.e. liberals). We don't need no steenking yankee politics down under in Oz!

>way--either you support the entirety of the canon storyline from first
>contact between the Vilani and the Terrans up to and including all the
>concepts in New Era (c.1203), or IMHO it would be far better to throw
>the whole thing out and start over from scratch, unburdened by people

But, as I have noted above, even the eventual dominance (may the day come soon!)
of GURPS Traveller will result in new Regency/RefCol stuff! So take heart ...
just don't expect *me* to buy any of the TNE Milieu stuff (though, to be fair,
Steve may well find a way to make the whole abortion of Virus as a Deus Ex
Machina *believable* ... stranger things, like GURPS Traveller!, have happened.)

So we probably have more in common than you suspect!

Phil
- ---------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU)
Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)
Designer, Standard Role Playing (PGD)

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1795
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Tuesday, September 9 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1796



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Starship ticket prices
Re: Plague of Duskir etc.
FF&S2 Errata list
T:GURPS
Re: Mining, core and ice
Gurps Traveller
Re: GURPS Traveller
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1794
Just returned
Re: FF&S2-The Good, the Bad, and The Ugly
Re: Solitaire Traveller???
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1789
Re: The Gateway Book - Replies to Various Comments (LONG)
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1789

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 11:26:12 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Starship ticket prices

Here is a revised version of the rules for calculating starship prices that
I posted some months ago. I hope you'll find them useful.


              Basic starship economics for Traveller
              ======================================

Starship tickets
================

Ticket prices for regular passenger liners can vary trememdously with local
conditions. Monopolies can allow a line to raise prices far above the
average while price wars can temporarily press the prices down to where they
won't even cover the liner's expenses. But to give the referee an idea of
what prices are reasonable, here are a few rules of thumb.

To calculate the price of a starship ticket figure out the yearly operating
expenses of a ship (including a fair profit to provide a return for the money
invested in the ship) and divide it by the number of passengers carried over
the year.

Note: Most operating expenses (bank payments, insurance, and maintenance) are 
paid in credits of the planet on which the ship is built. A few (food and 
life support and sometimes crew salaries) may be paid in the local credits of 
the planets the ship serves. For the purpose of these calculations this has 
been ignored. But if a ship is built on a world with a TL lower than that of 
the Imperial capital, there may be a considerable saving in costs. For that 
reason referees may consider expressing ticket costs in local credits, rather 
than in Crimps. 

A liner's expenses consists of:

1)  Crew salaries
2)  Crew life support
3)  Passenger life support
4)  Jump fuel
5)  Yearly maintenance
6)  Port fees
7)  Misjump insurance
8)  Personal misjump insurance
9)  Bank payments
10  Accident insurance
11) Profit

1) CREW SALARIES 

Base monthly pay for starship crew is: 

Captain         6000
Pilot           6000
Astrogator      5000
Technician      4000
Medic           2000
Steward         1000

Each extra rank level adds 10% of the base pay to the salary. There must be 
at least one higher-ranking crewmember for each six crewmembers (round off).
There must be one yet-higher-ranking crewmember for each six of those (round
off) and so on. finally, each department must have a department head that is
one rank higher than the highest-ranking other member of the department. 

Example: An engineering department with sixty members. Ten of those must be
of higher rank than the others. Of those ten, two must be of yet higher rank.
And of those two, one must be the Chief Engineer. So the department has fifty
crewmembers recieving Cr4000 per month, eight recieving Cr4400, one recieving
Cr 4800 and one recieving Cr 5200.

The captain of a ship counts as one rank higher than his highest-ranking
department head. The captain of the ship in the example above would recieve 
Cr6000+40% = Cr8400/month.

Skill levels does not affect salaries except insofar that a highly skilled
engineer can get a berth as a Chief Engineer on a Tukera Liner while his
less skilled colleague must make do with a job on a rusty old scow; but if
the highly skilled engineer for some reason took a job on a scow he'd not
get a higher salary because of his high skill.

Add all monthly salaries and multiply by 12 to get the yearly salaries paid.

Note: Shoestring operations may get by with less-than-standard salaries.


2) CREW LIFE SUPPORT
Life support is reckoned either in jumps (for regular ships) or in monthly 
periods (for non-regular ships). Regular ships makes either 35 jumps per year 
(if they go surface to surface) or 40 jumps per year (if they only go from 
jump limit to jump limit). Resupplying 40 times per year causes a sligtly 
higher wastage than 35 times per year, which accounts for the higher costs. 

For ships travelling jump point to jump point the ticket usually includes a
25 Cr shuttle ride respectively up from and down to the surface at each end
of the journey. 

Non-regular (tramp) ships usually only make two jumps per month, but the crew 
usually lives on the ship while it is in port. Consequently the crew has to 
pay for an additional 'unit' of life support every two jumps.

One unit of life support costs either Cr400 per jump or Cr1200 per month. Of
this money 25% goes to pay for replenishing the life support system. The rest
goes to pay for food.

Note: Shoestring operations may get by with less-than-standard food, but life 
support supplies cannot be skimped.

3) PASSENGER LIFE SUPPORT
Add the life support for the maximum possible number of passengers for a year 
and multiply by the percentage of utilization that the starship is expecting
(most regular passenger lines expect their ships to be between 80 and 90%
full each trip).

Steerage passengers:            Cr 100
Economy passengers:             Cr 300
Crew and mid passengers:        Cr 400
High passengers:                Cr 500

Of this money Cr100 goes to pay for replenishing the life support system. The
rest goes to food (steerage passengers must bring their own food).

Note: Steerage passengers sleep in bunks; Economy passengers sleep in small
staterooms or two to a large stateroom. Mid and High Passengers as described
in the rules.

4) JUMP FUEL
Regular passenger starships usually make 35 scheduled jumps per year if they
fly surface to surface and 40 per year if they only go from jump limit to
jump limit. They always buy refined fuel to save time. Refined fuel can cost
as little as Cr150 per T if the market is free; usually local taxes drive the 
cost up to Cr300 per T (This is the point where it becomes cheaper for a ship
to carry its own fuel purification plant and buy unrefined fuel; the money
saved makes up for the revenue lost due to the space the fuel purifier takes
up).

5) YEARLY MAINTENANCE
Yearly maintenance costs 1/1000th of the ship's purchase price.

6) PORT FEES 
Berthing costs are usually 1Cr per T of ship to arrive and remain for up to 6 
days plus an additional 20% per day thereafter, but varies from planet to
planet.

7) MISJUMP INSURANCE
Even when the drive is top-tuned and every possible precaution has been taken, 
misjumps occur occasionally. Unprovoked misjumps have roughly 1 chance in 216 
to occur each jump. Fortunately, not all misjumps automatically result in the 
complete loss of the ship. Results vary from the loss of a single jump's 
revenue (when the jump takes you to a neighbouring star system with full 
facilities) over the loss of a full year's revenue (when the jump takes you 36 
parsecs away, which means it will take you a year just to get back to your 
home port) over the loss of a sizable fraction of the ship's value in salvage 
and repairs (when the ship winds up in deep space with slagged engines) to the 
aforementioned complete loss. On the average a misjump works out to cost 
1/1000th of the ship's value. Curiously enough, the risk of an unprovoked 
misjump seems to have no connection to the age and state of maintenance of the 
drive. The risk of a misjump is much greater with ill maintained engines, of 
course, but these are considered provoked misjumps just as much as those 
induced by jumping from within the jump limit, and no insurance policy covers 
such).

Misjump insurance comes to 1/1000th of the ship's value per jump.

Note: Shoestring operations sometimes cuts corners by not paying for misjump
insurance.

8) PERSONAL MISJUMP INSURANCE
It is possible to buy personal misjump insurance. In the event of a misjump,
a passenger may be compensated for any losses caused by the misjump up to a
maximum of 1000 times the premium. In some localities (like the Early 
Imperium) such insurance is optional; in others (like the Late Imperium) a 
mandatory policy is included in the ticket cost.

9) BANK PAYMENTS
If the ship is not yet paid off, 5% of the ship's initial purchase price must
be paid each year to the bank.

11) ACCIDENT INSURANCE
A starship is expected to run for at least 40 years without major breakdowns
as long as it is properly maintained. It comes with a 40 year warranty from
the shipyard and any accidental breakdowns not caused by misjumps are paid
for by the shipyard (or rather, its insurance firm). 

After the warranty runs out, the owner has to pay for accident insurance
himself. This usually amounts to 1% of the ship's original purchase price per
decade it is old per year. In other words, if the ship is 40 to 49 years old,
accident insurance will cost 4% of original purchase price per year. 

Regular shipping firms don't usually keep ships that are more than 40 years
old. Shoestring operations do it all the time. They may or may not be able to
afford the premiums.

12) PROFIT
Profit is the return on the money invested expected by the people who owns
the ship. By the usual arrangement they have paid 20% of the initial purchace
price outrigt. A fair return on investments in something like space travel is
considered 3% per year unless local conditions differ markedly from the 
Imperial norm.

Profit usually amounts to 3% of 1/5th of the ship's purchase price. Note that 
if the ship has been bought second-hand, this can be a lot less than the
initial purchase price.

REVENUE
A liner's revenues are the price of all tickets sold. Number of tickets sold
is the maximum number of passengers carried multiplied by the utilization
percentage.

The price of a ticket is the expenses divided by the number of tickets sold.


STANDARD TICKET PRICES

A referee who wishes to avoid all those tedious calculations should make one
simple assumption: That any regular passenger liner the PCs need to board is
the size it is because it can fill its staterooms 80-90% per trip on the
average and that there are no special circumstances like monopolies, state
subsidies, price wars, seasonal fluctuations etc. Then all the Referee has to
do is to decide on the kind of ship that would reasonably service whatever
route is involved and check this table:

REGULAR PASSENGER LINER TRAVELLING FROM SURFACE TO SURFACE (35 jumps per 
year):
             
           Steerage    Low      Economy     Mid      High
           Passage   Passage    Passage   Passage   Passage
Jump-1:     1,200     1,400      2,800     4,800     6,200
Jump-2:     1,500     1,800      3,800     6,600     8,400
Jump-3:     2,100     2,200      5,100     9,000    11,400
                                             
Note: The prices above was arrived at by designing a number of 600 T ships
each dedicated to one kind of passengers, ie. a ship with 1 T of cargo space
per passenger and 1 steward per 8 passengers for High Passengers, another
ship with negligible cargo space and 1 steward per 50 passengers for Mid
Passengers, a ship with small staterooms for Economy Passengers, a ship with
Low Berths and 1 medic per 20 berths for Low Passengers, and a ship with
bunks only for Steerage Passengers. In all cases, except the ships for 
steerage passengers, the design included emergency medical low berths enough 
to accomodate a full complement of crew and passengers.

HIGH, MID, AND LOW PASSAGE
High, Mid, and Low passages are not tickets. They are travel vouchers issued
by various Imperial institutions and a number of licenced private institutions
(mostly megacorporations). By Imperial law any High Passage voucher must be
accepted by any ship licenced to carry passengers as full payment for a High 
Passage ticket, regardless of the length of the jump. Likewise the Mid and
Low Passage must be accepted as payment for Mid and Low Passage tickets. The 
ship captain can then exchange the voucher for the price of the ticket at any 
Class A or B starport. For starships with a flexible attitude to ticket 
prices (ie. tramp ships) the law imposes a maximum reimbursement of 
Crimp10,000 for a High Passage, Crimp8,000 for a Mid Passage, and Crimp2000 
for a Low Passage, unless they can document expenses that warrants a higher
price.

Often a passenger who is about to use a passage voucher to take a jump-1 or 
jump-2 trip will try to sell his voucher to someone who plans to take a
jump-3 trip. Such trades are technically illegal, but the Imperium usually
ignore it. The going rate is around Crimp9,000 for a High Passage and 
Crimp7,200 for a Mid Passage.

HOT PASSAGE
Hot Passage is slang for a type of passage that unscrupulous starship
captains sometimes offer. It consists of two passengers sharing the same
berth turn and turn about ("hot bunking"). This is illegal because it means
exceeding the ship's life support rating and the ship's number of emergency 
low berths. The way it usually works, a passenger whose trip is paid for by 
his employers will pay in full and get a reciept for the full amount. The 
captain then sells the spot to another traveller for 50-60% of the usual 
cost. He pays half the amount to the first passenger and shares the rest with 
the purser.



      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 11:56:34 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Plague of Duskir etc.

Andrew Moffatt-Vallance writes:
>Lets take a pause and look at just what the PoD is in game terms. It is
>a plot device to explain how the Terrans could come to totally dominate
>the Ziru Sirka without being culturally extinguished by the massive weight
>of Vilani numbers. If we remove the PoD, then another plot device will be
>needed to explain just how the Terrans came to domiate and subvert a culture
>that outnumbered them at least several thousand to one. Thats one hell of
>a population gradiant to fight your way up.

That depends. If we assume population distributions similar to those of the
3rd Imperium, then the Plague is neither here nor there. The Ziru Sirkaa
would have had a population of around 10 trillion, and a 'measly' billion
deaths wouldn't make much difference to that. But if population distributions
were different, then things look much better. Say that the Vilani for the
most part only settled worlds with pleasants biospheres and only kept small
outposts on the less congenial planets. The 10,000 worlds of the Siru Zirka
could well have been mostly empty (Perhaps the 'several thousand worlds'
said to have been affected by the Plague of Duskir indicates almost every
world the Terrans settled on, which would again indicate how many of the Siru
Zirka's 10,000 worlds that were worth settling on). Say further that the 
Vilani deliberately kept their number limited on most of their colonies. 
There would have been some high-population worlds but not nearly as many as 
in the year 1100, or the Year 0 for that matter. This goes a long way to 
explain how the Terrans could actually wind up in the majority on some
Vilani worlds. There simply weren't that many Vilani there in the first
place. Naturally one would expect the average number of Vilani to be
higher nearer to Vland and lower nearer to the edges whereas the Terrans
would only be able to export immigrants in sizable numbers close to the
edge. That dovetails rather neatly, I think.
 
>Next, lets cover the Vilani response. One can assume that the Vilani would
>have encountered some fairly vicious plagues early in their starfaring. 

TD#20 states that most of the diseases the Vilani had encountered before
the Terran ones had been annoying rather than serious. I guess that means
that _some_ of them had been serious.

>And one can at the very least assume that the Vilani would have developed a
>system of quarantine to deal with them. They may have also developed some
>antibotics and the like, but this is not certain and is actually irrelevant
>since at the time of the PoD they have access to Terran medical technology.
>So why didn't the Vilani simply quarantine to stop the plague. Because at the
>time of the PoD, the Vilani weren't in charge any longer, the Terrans were.

The first of the plagues came with Terran POWs. The big one, the one with
multiple outbreaks on many worlds at approximately the same time, the one
that Duskir helped to put under control, came with the Terran occupation 
troops. Other plagues appeared with the Terran immigrants. Different
measures would have been possible at different times.

Question: Did the Vilani worlds have a more uniform technology than the
worlds of the 3rd Imperium? Almost certainly. Did they all have TL 11? I
doubt it very much.

>So why was the Terran medical intervention unable to stop the plague? This 
>comes down to two facts. Firstly the plague agents were viruses. How does 
>a virus work? To put not too fine a point on it, we haven't got the 
faintest idea. 

This works only if you assume that a given TL implies capability rather than
knowledge. In other words, that the high Terran medical TL implies that they
could have created fast retro-viruses if they had known how to, but they
didn't know. That the knowledge of how to create retroviruses was discovered
later than the Plague of Duskir. I have no problem with it, but it is a
definition of TLs that not all may agree with.
 


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 06:14:43 -0400
From: "Chris Cox" <chriscox@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: FF&S2 Errata list

Just like to mention that a Fire, Fusion & Steel (T4 Edition) Errata and
Addendum list "http://users.aol.com/ogerdude/ffs-errata.htm" is available on
my web page.  If you don't nave web access or you have trouble accessing the
page please feel free to email me and I'll send you a text copy of the list. 
Also from the Errata list you can access Bruce Alan Macintosh's Definitive
Sensor Rules and Stuart C. Squibb's FFS Equations Web page.

Chris Cox
"Investment banking galley slave in New York City"
(chriscox@ix.netcom.com)
The Draconis Cluster Traveller pages
(http://users.aol.com/yanbeck/trav.htm)

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 09 Sep 1997 23:07:10 +1200
From: Andrew Moffatt-Vallance <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: T:GURPS

Well, I for one am fairly excited by this development. Not so much for the
"new" game system (RuneQuest:Traveller however might <g>), but for the
prospect of new CT suppliments (I'm with Hitchikers: Leaving the trees was
a bad idea). The idea of the new alternate timeline is very exciting. So
neatly sidestepping the issue of alterations to canon by attrition, just what
does this new timeline have in store for us? I seem too remember right at the
end of the CT era a plotline developing in the TNS regarding someone surviving
contact with jumpspace. Can we expect this enigma to be resolved? Then we
have the aftermath of the 5th Frontier War. What is going to happen in the
Spinward Marches? Will Strephon actually make Norris Archduke? What is going
to happen with the Aslan? Remember the Aslan have pretty much run out of
worlds to expand into in the Trojan Reaches and Reft Sectors, so the Ihatei
incursions are still on the cards. Then there's the actual outcome of the FFW
itself. If one looks at the previous wars you can't help but get the feeling
of a slow Imperial retreat in the face of the Zhodani (in every war before
the 5th, the Imperium lost territory to the Zhodani); but in the FFW they
actually made up ground! Sure, not a heck of a lot of ground, but I can see
Imperial propaganda blowing this all out of proportion leading to all sorts
of expectations in the population. Then there's the Sword Worlds question.
Just how long will the artifical construct that the Imperium carved out of
half of the Sword Worlds last? and just how far is the Imperium willing to
go to preserve it?

Any how, I can see lots of potential here (the vexed question of Norris's
sexual orientation may even be finally answered <g>). I'm not about to
dump my curious T4/CT hybrid or my non-canon Greater Magellanic Cloud
campaign setting; but I will be buying T:GURPS and ruthlessly ripping out
any thing I find useful. And I certainly will be looking forwards to some
lively discussions on the course of the alternate timeline (Loren, if you
need anyone to help, my hand's up) on the TML.

  Andrew etc.
    a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz

****************************************************************************
The longest distance between two points is with children.
****************************************************************************

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 13:07:22 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Tommy Grav <tommy.grav@astro.uio.no>
Subject: Re: Mining, core and ice

On Mon, 8 Sep 1997, Craig Berry wrote:

> Diamonds are nearly always of organic-carbon origin.  Thus, you wouldn't
> be likely to find them on a lifeless world such as yours.  On life-bearing
> worlds that do have diamonds, they'd be in the upper crust, associated
> with coal beds.  On your world, gems like sapphires, rubies, and emeralds
> (for example) would be far more likely; opals would also be an interesting
> choice, as these are even more fragile than most gems, and call for almost
> manual excavation of the workface to get most of them out intact. 

OK, I'll throw out the diamond approach and use the other gemstones.
Thanks.

By the way, at what depth would one expect these gemstones to exist,
especially the opals, which is a very beautiful stone? I was thinking of
making it a planet, dominatedby a mining corp that specialize in a special
type of opal only yet found at this place.

> > It wasn't a rotational figure around the sun, but its selfrotation around
> > its axis. Therefor its day would be 300 siderial years, while its year is
> > as you state around 200 days. I can't find anything on laws for the
> > rotation of planets around their own axis so I simple choose a value.
> > Comments on this would be appriciated.
> 
> It seems a very great coincidence that a world would be so nearly at rest
> with respect to the stars, given that no force is drawing it into that
> rotation rate via e.g. tidal resonances or the like, and indeed solar
> tides would tend to spin it up over time.  That's not to say it couldn't
> happen, just that it'd be considered a significant oddity, with scientists
> actively investigating how it got that way.

Well, like I said I just picked a large number to make its days really
long. On the basis of your arguments I'll tone the number down but still
keep it large, to like you said make it an anomaly that scientist would
want to study.

This is mainly for plot reasons. The mining operation is very high
security, and with a scientist research station on the planet this
security would be harder to maintain. I'm tinking of getting the
characters involved in some way between this research station and the
mining corp.

> Wow, that's one dark planet!  Not surprised your temp came in 70 K higher.
> The Moon is around albedo 0.04, IIRC; your world, which we've all presumed
> would have significant surface ices, should be quite a bit higher, at
> least 0.2 I'd think.

I know. I was thinking Mercury, but of course if its covered in ice, which
it should be, the albedo will be significantly larger. I'll change that
to, thanks.

> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>    |   Craig Berry - cberry@cinenet.net

Tommy Grav                  tommy.grav@astro.uio.no    
Institute of Astrophysics   http://www.uio.no/~tommygr/
University in Oslo          "If you value your lives, be somwhere 
Norway                       else!" - Ambassador Delenn B5 

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 13:54:55 MET
From: "Volker A. Greimann" <GREI5001@uni-trier.de>
Subject: Gurps Traveller

One thing i don't understand about SJG's plan:
*Why-o-why don't they set it in 1107 or somewhere in that area?
They wouldn't have to contradict MT and TNE and would be producing 
perfectly legitimate CT-material (with Gurps-rules). 
As i see it, 1107 and a 1116 where Strephon isn't killed shouldn't be 
that much different from each other! So why contradict MT and TNE, 
when you can produce the same products, set 10 years earlier, and 
consistant with Traveller Canon?
I'd favor a setting that remains consistant with Traveller Canon, as 
would most TML-members.


(Crossposted to TML and SJ)
Ad Astra,
V.A.G.       
- ------  Volker A. Greimann, also known as: Grei5001@uni-trier.de  ----
- -- Am Weidengraben 86,C6 - 54296 Trier - Germany - T+F: +49651148846 -
- ------- check out: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Vault/4061 --------
- ---- Student of Law, Gamer, Illuminatus Primus, Slayer of Windows95 --

- -----  "Don't hold me up: I am just barely ahead of insanity!!!" -----

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 08:56:09 -0400
From: 34zbtxq@cmuvm.csv.cmich.edu (Susan M. Shock)
Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller

>That is, *if* IG doesn't go out of business, as a company which has
>produced such shoddy products is likely to do. At this point, no, SJGTrav
>doesn't refute canon, but within the next year, I wouldn't be surprised if
>it's the only remaining publisher of new Traveller materials. If and when
>that happens, we could be in for a canon schism.

I think this is very unlikely. What I think (and HOPE) is more likely is
that IG will learn a thing or two about editing and the game industry in
general from the experienced staff at SJG, and improve the quality of their
products. Right now, IG has a split personality; if CORE writes it (and IG
doesn't mess it up too much) it's  generally excellent. If IG themselves do
it, it often isn't very well put together. (FF&S2 is more like CORE; the
authors did a good job, IG messed it up.)  One thing that would help would
be if IG follows SJG's lead; prompt errata, and fixing mistakes in the next
printing. But T4 (or 4.1, as it will soon be) is not going to die. I myself
love GURPS, but for nostalgia sake if nothing else will continue using the
Traveller system to run Traveller .

Allen

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 09:07:58 -0400
From: 34zbtxq@cmuvm.csv.cmich.edu (Susan M. Shock)
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1794

>* SJG will InvalidateRect the BEST milieu Traveller ever had!  Bring back 
>the Rebellion and Hard Times!!!

Let's try this again; the GURPS Traveller background is an ALTERNATE
TIMELINE. it does not inavlidate anything! In the OFFICIAL Traveller
timeline, the Rebellion and the Collapse and the Virus and all that still
occur on schedule. This is a "what-if" scenario designed, among other
things, to make GURPS Traveller material  separate from IG's stuff.

>* The technology and combat system do not have a "Traveller" feel; but 
>neither did TNE.  Even though T4 is a "change", it keeps the same 'feel' 
>to it.  But, why did we stop calling it "combat armor" and confuse battle 
>dress with combat armor?  Powered and unpowered battle dress?  eR?

Maybe because the current setting is 1,105 years before the "classic" one?
maybe somewhere along the line someone said "Y'know, let's call nonpowered
battle dress "Combat Armor"...less confusing that way..."

All it takes is a little imagination...

Allen

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 15:28:55 MET
From: "Volker A. Greimann" <GREI5001@uni-trier.de>
Subject: Just returned

Hi, i just returned from my 3-week TML-free vacartrion and am just 
wading thru the 2000+ mails on my server. You sure were busy  ;-)
I already see some comments concerning my Core-revision, and will 
answer these and other things asap! 

Ad Astra,
V.A.G.       
- ------  Volker A. Greimann, also known as: Grei5001@uni-trier.de  ----
- -- Am Weidengraben 86,C6 - 54296 Trier - Germany - T+F: +49651148846 -
- ------- check out: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Vault/4061 --------
- ---- Student of Law, Gamer, Illuminatus Primus, Slayer of Windows95 --

- -----  "Don't hold me up: I am just barely ahead of insanity!!!" -----

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 08:48:04 -0500 (CDT)
From: jatkins6@ix.netcom.com (John Atkinson)
Subject: Re: FF&S2-The Good, the Bad, and The Ugly

You wrote: 

>The firearms design is over engineered for my tastes, the only thing
>missing is tables for effects of temp and humidity on projectiles. My
>Hornady Reloading Manual at least had that.<G>

Axtually, I was stressing over the damn small arms sequence.  It lists 
all these really cool ammo types (DS, HEAP, Hollowpoint, etc.) and 
gives a chart for price, but doesn't explain what the effects are (or I 
could have overlooked it. . . )

John M. Atkinson

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 09 Sep 1997 07:29:08 -0600
From: Erwin Fritz <efritz@glja.com>
Subject: Re: Solitaire Traveller???

Kevin L. Kitchens wrote:
> 
> This may be a FAQ, but not on any that I've seen.
> 
> Are there any Solitaire adventures for CT or other incarnations of
> Traveller?
> 

Double Adventure 4 - Marooned Alone is designed to be played either
as a single player (w/referee) or solitaire.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 09:50:59 -0400 (EDT)
From: SemoFetus@aol.com
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1789

>A.  the solomani , this is the group that conquered the 1st Imp. and yet
>they are treated as minor players in almost all printed CT, T4 expansions
>.. I for one would like to see more on the solomani and more information
>on adventuring in the solomani rim or the border of the solomani rim . I
>think a book detailing the solomani and there lifestyle would be very
>interesting .

The solomani ARE relatively minor players in the published backgrounds.  Just
the way it is.  There was a book published on the Solomani called "Solomani &
Aslan" also called "Rats & Cats" for obvious reasons.

Sure, they conquered the 1st Imperium.  Big Deal, that was a long, long time
ago.  Rome once conquered all of the known world.  Italy is now a relatively
minor player in world affairs (no offense intended to our Italian readers).

>B.  Aliens archive for T4 . this book was a major disappointment ! when I
>shell out      $23.00 for a book I expect it to be something I can use .
>when I saw aliens archive I was expecting the major races not a bunch of
>silly minor races suitable only for a crappy ST episode . the tekundu ?
>what a stupid alien , its a human with the water retention ability of a
>camel ! Tim Brown I want what you were smoking when you came up with this
>stuff .

Then you should have taken a look through the book before you purchased it, I
guess.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 07:03:45 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: Re: The Gateway Book - Replies to Various Comments (LONG)

On Mon, 8 Sep 1997, John Atkinson wrote:
> You wrote: 
> 
> >Ah, the weapons in EA were designed using 3G3.
> 
> The logic of which is simply astounding. . . 
> 
> "Don't buy our products, they are no good.  Buy this other game 
> system's products."  Now I know. . . so back to scrounging used book 
> stores for TNE stuff.  At least it's self consistent--and where it's 
> not, it puts the 'errata' in the back of the book so I can build bigger 
> and better versions thereof.

No, 3G3 is the standard weapons design system for _eleven_ (plus) game
systems. (At least there's eleven systems in the conversion section) It
was originally concieved as a game-independent design system. At the time
this was announced, IG had NO products. Strictly speaking, 3G3 is also the
design system for TNE...there's seven pages of conversion information for
that game in there. Will it create an identical weapon to FFS? No, for the
same reason that it won't produce identical results to FFS2, they're
different systems that use different assumptions and equations for their
designs.

> If you're going to bill something as 'The most realistic, comprehensive 
> vehicle and equipment design system ever published for science-fiction 
> role-playing' (from the back of T4 FF&S) then it ought to be able to 
> build the equipment in at least the supplements for that game. . . 

You can, except that since the equipment in the supplements was designed
with other systems, since FFS2 _didn't_ exist when the supplements were
written, the stats might be different. Also, sometimes, as in the case of
ships and vehicles in the T4 rulebook, they were simply made up out of
whole cloth.

The problem of course, comes about when we start talking about TL -12 5 mm
caseless ammuntition...there's no way we could say which if any of the
designs are accurate...all we can try to do is make sure that internally,
each system is consistent.

Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 10:00:50 -0400 (EDT)
From: SemoFetus@aol.com
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1789

Whoops.  Finished the last message to early...

>C. 2300 AD , the back ground was alright if you like the idea of the
>french rulings the world after twilight 2000 , of course when I buy or
>play a game that is set on earth I expect some small degree of realism ,
>Can any one name any ground war in europe that france didn't get raped in
>? Basically 2300 irked me because I had a hard time thinking the united
>states would ever fall behind canada france and africa in industry ,
>military , or space tech. even with WW3, also why is the american arm so
>limited while everything cool is on then french arm . do any of you
>people really think this would happen ? . seems to me that the author was
>going out of his way to break conventional thinking on the future . 

Yes and no.  From what I understand (its made clear in the 2300 AD books, I
believe), the background was a joint effort of many people all who played a
massive simulation to build it.  In addition, I bet it was pretty unrealistic
in the mid 1700s to say "In 200 years, the American Colonies are going to be
a world leader", and most would have said that that was pretty unrealistic.

Its a game, and a game that's been out of print for like 7 years or something
absurd like that, relax.  If America was involved in WW3 with limited nuclear
exchange, the U.S.ed be in a heap of trouble.  That's the way it goes.

America's already falling behind in a number of ways, and we haven't had a
WW3 yet.

>D. the 2300 system , it was a burden to play and combat was long and
>complex , if I were not a math major I would have been lost . combat
>should be quick and deadly
> [ CT , T4 ] and character gen should be as quick as possible . maybe
>2300AD would be o.k. if it used the T4 system and cleaned up some of the
>stupid background quirks 
>the concept of the united states not being the world leader in the future
>seems highly improbable .  IMHO ..   

The system has been out of print for like 7 years, why beat a dead horse?  In
addition, there is a 2300 AD mailing list you can subscribe to and read and
write to.

As far as the background, keep an open mind.  There was a time when Romans
thought the Roman Empire would never end.  There was a time when the sun
never set on the British empire, and so on...  Everything collapses
eventually.

Semo

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1796
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Tuesday, September 9 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1797



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: FF&S2-The Good, the Bad, and The Ugly
3G3, EA, and FF&S2 (was: The Gateway Book)
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1793
Re: The Gateway Book - Replies to Various Comments (LONG)
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1791
another take on TL classes!
Australian socialist = liberal?
Post Convention Sale
Re: T:GURPS
Re: CT, MT, TNE, T4 vs GURPS, revisited (LONG)
RE: Thoughts on roleplaying
Diablo stinks...
Re: Mining, core and ice
Re: CT, MT, TNE, T4 vs GURPS, revisited
T:GURPS/Sword Worlds
OH dear! not a 101 book.
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1796
Re: Thoughts on roleplaying
Re: GURPS Traveller announced....

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 07:26:17 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: Re: FF&S2-The Good, the Bad, and The Ugly

Sam gives a balanced review of FFS2, but says that you still can't design
an X-boat with it.

You can, but the computers that FFS2 (and _All_ the other design systems
_since_ the LBB's which _had_ no computer design system Jeez, to ramble a
bit, I'm glad there wasn't a TML then we'd be hearing all about the
imminent death of GDW for producing such a horrible book..."look they left
an _entire_ design sequence out!") are _spaceship navigation and control_
computers. using those to make X-boat databanks is sort of on the order of
trying to take the onboard computer in your Ford and use it for word
processing (you probably could, in theory, they use a general purpose
processor) but it'll be horribly inefficient.

There are _NO_ computer design systems for Traveller, anything _but_
starship control systems have been handwaved into existence, so the vast
bulk of your X-boat is finely shaded handwave _anyway_.

Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 97 10:48:41 -0400
From: Derek Wildstar <wildstar@qrc.com>
Subject: 3G3, EA, and FF&S2 (was: The Gateway Book)

jatkins6@ix.netcom.com (John Atkinson) wrote:
> >Ah, the weapons in EA were designed using 3G3.
>
> If you're going to bill something as 'The most realistic, comprehensive 
> vehicle and equipment design system ever published for science-fiction 
> role-playing' (from the back of T4 FF&S) then it ought to be able to 
> build the equipment in at least the supplements for that game. . . 

For whatever it's worth, John, _Emperor's Arsenal_ was written by the author
of 3G3, and it was written before FF&S2 was published.  In his place, I'd
consider either one to be sufficient reason for using 3G3.

That being said, I do stand behind FF&S2.  While you'll get slightly
different results from FF&S2, both 3G3 and FF&S2 will produce results in the
acceptable range for modern-day and historical firearms.

The results diverge when projecting into the future, but on one hand the
FF&S2 results are arguably more "Travelleresque" in that they're consistent
with previous Traveller material.  On the other hand, 3G3 doesn't provide
design sequences that cover Traveller-style PGMP/FGMP weapons (you
design them in 3G3 as small particle acellerators), and 3G3 doesn't work
for Traveller-style long-range starship lasers or meson guns.  Providing
all of this in FF&S2 means that you get a consistent weapon design system
for Traveller, from your hold-out laser pistol to your starship's main guns.
On the third hand (at least, if you're a hiver), FF&S2 doesn't provide for
binary-propellant weapons.

Since we couldn't include 3G3 in FF&S2, the only other alternative would
have been to leave weapons design out of the book.  In my opinion, this
would have been extremely frustrating (not to mention expensive) for FF&S2
designers.  It's hard to design many vehicles (like tanks and warplanes)
without having the weapons they carry already designed.  Imagine your
frustration and annoyance if you'd had to go out and purchase 3G3 in
addition to FF&S2 before you could design anything.

For small arms, either 3G3 or FF&S2 designs should be acceptable, and can be
used within the same campaign.  Any differences can be explained by a
slightly difference choice of materials and technology based on different
worlds of manufacture.


wildstar@qrc.com
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Prepare the Wave Motion Gun!

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 09 Sep 1997 07:48:03 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1793

At 04:00 AM 9/9/97 EDT, you wrote:
>douge berry , after reading your response and usage of the example of the
>british I have to agree in essance . however someone please explain how
>any nation could have sealed its borders dureing WWIII espeasealy a
>central nation like france . Look at WW1 and WW2 , I feel that thins
>would pretty much go the same in WW3 ,

By acting early and with great shock.  The French grabbed enough territory
to prevent refugees from reaching French soil proper.  Remember, France
wasn't a combatant, withdrawing from NATO when the Americans and British
came to the aid of the German Army in Poland.

I think France took a few nuclear strikes, but nothing major.  By 1999,
France had the only major standing army in Europe, and it was committed to
nothing other than defending the borders.
- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 09 Sep 1997 07:42:37 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: The Gateway Book - Replies to Various Comments (LONG)

At 01:04 AM 9/9/97 -0500, you wrote:
>You wrote: 
>
>>No to interupt a perfectly good rant, but 3G3 and EA were both 
>designed by
>>Greg Porter, and both were released before FFS@ was written.
>
>I don't really follow 'industry personalities' (they don't follow me, 
>why should I follow them?) but I can tell the difference between a 
>product with a big honkin' 'T4 Marc Miller's Traveller' on the top and 
>one without.  If 'they' (meaning the yammerhead who made this winner of 
>a decision) intended for 3G3 to be the official small arms sequence, 
>then why in God's name would they put a totally different design 
>sequence in the book intended as the 'official' equipment design book?  
>Why not just say "buy friggin' 3G3 if you want to design sick small 
>arms like a full-auto 20mm ATR.[1]"??? 

Since Greg answers his mail about once a year, I still haven't heard form
him, but the way it seems to have happened follows:

Greg Porter designs very good games (CORPS, TimeLords, Macho Women With
Guns), and a few years back he designed an universal design system for
building weapons, called Guns! Guns! Guns!  Included were conversions for
several systems.. The 2nd edition included MegaTraveller.

There was much rejoicing, along with much carnage.

When the original IG team was being put together, Greg was brought in to do
gearhead things.  Since he had a perfectly acceptable (if not excellent)
system for designing weapons, he wrote up the new T4 designs using what he
had.  The very latest version of his system (3G3) has conversions for MT,
TNE, and T4.

When Emperor's Aresenal was written, I don't think the new FFS was even
being written.  So Greg cranked out the weapons, wrote some pretty good
side rules, and sent the puppy in.

Then we get FFS2, which has a similar, but *slightly* different weapons
design system.  

*Sigh*

For what it's worth, I prefer 3G3 to FFS2.  The results are close enough in
the end so that you could do as Rod (?) suggested, and discount difference
in performance to manufacturing variances.

- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 09 Sep 1997 23:25:48 +0800
From: Michael Bailey <mickb@opera.iinet.net.au>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1791

>Can any one name any ground war in europe that france didn't get raped in
>?

Austerlitz....to name one...*g*
Michael Bailey
mickb@opera.iinet.net.au
				
pillock-at-large and proud supporter of the Chelsea FC and Fremantle AFL
Clubs!

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 09 Sep 1997 23:38:18 +0800
From: Michael Bailey <mickb@opera.iinet.net.au>
Subject: another take on TL classes!

How 'bout:

0 - 3	PreIndustrial

(late TL 3 corresponds _roughly_ to the beginnings of the industrial
revolution, by early TL 4 it's in full swing)

4 - 6 Industrial

7 - 8 Pre-Stellar

(exploring off-world, but no jump capability)

9 - 11 Low Stellar

(jump drives, but astrography can be limiting to jump-1 and 2 drives)

12 - 15 Stellar

(astrography no longer a problem in all but the least dense areas e.g.
Great Rift)

16+ Exotic

(beyond normal Imp tech . 1107)


Seeya,


Michael Bailey
mickb@opera.iinet.net.au
				
pillock-at-large and proud supporter of the Chelsea FC and Fremantle AFL
Clubs!

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 09 Sep 1997 23:51:50 +0800
From: Michael Bailey <mickb@opera.iinet.net.au>
Subject: Australian socialist = liberal?

Of course Phil, the ALP covers everything from the old Keatiing rabid Right
to the Loony Left...

...hey, I wonder if MM used the ALP as the basis for the Solomani Party? *g*

Slaint=E8
Michael Bailey
mickb@opera.iinet.net.au
			=09
pillock-at-large and proud supporter of the Chelsea FC and Fremantle AFL
Clubs!

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 97 08:59:37 +0100
From: Niko Wieleba <scarab1@pacbell.net>
Subject: Post Convention Sale

Hello!

Once more I have had a successful hunt at GenCon and Gateway and below 
are the items I picked up.  I've tried to judge them fairly by condition 
- -- if you have any questions, please feel free to ask.  They are priced 
close to or at what I paid for them, so this sale is, for the most part, 
merely to recover my fundage invested.

Please do not request an item unless you intend to pay for it.  Once we 
have agreed upon the shipping of items I will expect payment within two 
weeks of that point -- I will not chase after it nor will I send 
reminders.

I prefer to send items by First Class mail. If you want some other 
arrangement, let me know.

If you are interested in any of the items, email me directly at:  
scarab1@pacbell.net

Do not muddle up the list, please!

Thanks!

Niko


CT:
The Traveller Book (HB) Good  $15
JTAS #9  VG  $5
LBB Box w/Books #0-3  Box G, contents VG  $15
Book 7 Merchant Prince  Good  $10
Supplement 4 Citizens of the Imperium  EX  $5
Understanding Traveller  Good  $3
The Best of JTAS #1  Good to VG  $5
Supplement 2 Animal Encounters  VG  $5
Supplement 3 Spinward Marches  VG  $5
Action Aboard (FASA)  Good  $10
Double Adventure 6 Divine Inter./Night of Conquest  VG  $6
Double Adventure 2 Mission on Mithril/Across the BF  VG  $5
Double Adventure 1 Shadows/Annic Nova  VG  $5

MT:
MT Boxed set (only Player's Manual, Referee Manual and Map) Box Fair, 
Contents VG $10
Kafer Dawn  VG  $4
Rebellion Sourcebook  VG  $5
Referee's Companion  VG  $5
Rebellion Sourcebook  Fine  $6
Referee's Manual  VG  $5

Other:
Snapshot (no box, all contents in VG condition; counters punched but seem 
to be all there)
  $5



**I'm not suffering from insanity....
     I enjoy every minute of it.**

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 08:48:48 -0700
From: kenji@accessone.com (Kenji Schwarz)
Subject: Re: T:GURPS

>Well, I for one am fairly excited by this development. Not so much for the
>"new" game system (RuneQuest:Traveller however might <g>), but for the
>prospect of new CT suppliments (I'm with Hitchikers: Leaving the trees was
>a bad idea). The idea of the new alternate timeline is very exciting. So
>neatly sidestepping the issue of alterations to canon by attrition, just what
>does this new timeline have in store for us?

Norris beats back the dirty mind-raping Zhos using big strapping ihatei
mercenaries, who wear rather smart-looking uniforms of his very own design.
Centuries of ungulate flatulence lead to runaway greenhouse effect on most
of the Two Thousand Worlds, and the Vargr, whiffing pre-cooked meat for the
taking, pour across the Lesser Rift without the protection of jump bubbles.
The Outworld Coalition collapses, and Norris is glamorously victorious.

Unfortunately, the Imperial citizenry of the Marches, stirred up by Darrian
attempts at psychohistorical, go haywire and break the armistice of their
own accord.  Snot-nosed Solomani mobs invade the Consulate and pass along
strains of amoebic dysentary for which the Zhos have no natural immunity,
and gazillions of turbaned Zhos and goateed Zhanes expire messily.
Meanwhile, the two Sword World states reunite unexpectedly and declare
themselves to be the long-dormant Teutonic Order, dedicated to fighting the
Templar Menace.

Strephon has no choice at this point but to call upon his lurking Hiver
puppetmasters to save the day.  The Great Old Ones release a cheese-based
virus in the form of a purple dinosaur that destroys interstellar
civilization as we know it, but in a nice way.  Strephon has the erring
Norris replaced by a clever biological robot imposter, and likes the idea
so much that he does the same for himself.  The two of them become Elvis
impersonators, form a glitter-rock band to tour the Solomani Confederation
incognito, and live happily ever after.

Then Grandfather wakes up and sees his kids taking a shower -- and realizes
it was all a dream.

Kenji Schwarz
kenji@accessone.com

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 10:47:04 -0500
From: "Kevin L. Kitchens" <peiprog@feist.com>
Subject: Re: CT, MT, TNE, T4 vs GURPS, revisited (LONG)

Can someone spell out for this new-to-the-list person exactly what this is 
about?

On  9 Sep 97 at 0:40, Charles Li wrote:

> 
> >From owner-traveller@phaser.showcase.mpgn.com Mon Sep  8 
> >it and incorporate it in my own personal campaign.  I am looking 
> forward to
> >GURPS Traveller.
> >
> >One last thing, please stop SJG from substituting his Tech levels for
> >Travellers.
> >
> >Daniel Poulin
> >pould@netcom.ca
> 
>   If SJG did that, it wuldn't conform to GURPS.  Listen, its going to 
> happen, and a good portion of us dedicated Traveller players are 
> embracing it while others a rejecting it from every angle possible 
> including misinterpretation. No side is "right" or wrong... I am just as
> dedicated (1979) a Traveller PLAYER as any one of you, and I don't care if I
> run the risk of being labelled by the rabid faction of the TM (since I will
> likely adopt to GURPS Traveller due to my belief in GURPS as a more matured
> system, not taking anything away from what will be T4.1).   For every
> individual who shirks at GURPS, there will be someone who thinks its the
> best thing since the round wheel.  The TML may reject it as heresy, but let
> SJG do what it will, because Marc Miller and IG/Sweetpea have already
> entrusted them with Traveller's good name. 
>     Its up to them now to run with the ball...  while we are still 
> holding the ball for T4.1
> 
> ChasLiMD@hotmail.com
> 
> 
> ______________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
> 
 The Perfect Game - http://www.peiprog.com/PerfectGame
========================================================
 Serving enthusiasts of computer baseball simulations
========================================================

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 11:48:40 -0500
From: "Kevin L. Kitchens" <peiprog@feist.com>
Subject: RE: Thoughts on roleplaying

MOO is a very good system and I too have taking years of Traveller (plus 
other games) and attempted to encourage the development of the MOO I am a 
Q/Wizard/Admin on.

It is a Trek themed MOO, but we are finally bringing about a skills system, 
attributes, etc.  More RP than a MUD too.

You can check it out at telnet:trek.datadriven.com:1701, however this is an 
old version that is going down in the next couple of weeks to bring about the 
skills based MOO we are coding now.  

Anyway, I would love, if anyone was going to do TravellerMOO to assist.  I've 
thought it over many times.

Kevin


 The Perfect Game - http://www.peiprog.com/PerfectGame
========================================================
 Serving enthusiasts of computer baseball simulations
========================================================

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 11:54:16 -0500
From: "Kevin L. Kitchens" <peiprog@feist.com>
Subject: Diablo stinks...

Just wait for Ultima Online then.  It is supposed to do for Multiplayer CRPG 
what Diablo failed miserably at.

On  9 Sep 97 at 17:48, D.Moodie wrote:
> Because 'Diablo' put Computer Role Playing back 10 years and turned it
> into a depth-free hack'n'slash with no NPC interaction, an awful spell
> system and an appaling character system.
 The Perfect Game - http://www.peiprog.com/PerfectGame
========================================================
 Serving enthusiasts of computer baseball simulations
========================================================

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 10:09:21 -0700 (PDT)
From: Craig Berry <cberry@cinenet.net>
Subject: Re: Mining, core and ice

> Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 13:07:22 +0200 (MET DST)
> From: Tommy Grav <tommy.grav@astro.uio.no>
> 
> By the way, at what depth would one expect these gemstones to exist,
> especially the opals, which is a very beautiful stone? I was thinking of
> making it a planet, dominatedby a mining corp that specialize in a special
> type of opal only yet found at this place.

Gemstones in general require heat and pressure to form.  Thus, they are
found near volcanic structures, or where old deep crust has been exposed
by weathering, uplift, or a combination of the two.  This is a good reason
to use Doug's molten-core model.  The world need not be currently
volcanically active (though it could be); Mars's extinct but large
volcanos would be a good model for you.

As for depth, they could be found all through the crust, though obviously
a mining operation would tend to focus on the more accessible veins near
the surface -- say 0 to 2 km down, perhaps.

> > > It wasn't a rotational figure around the sun, but its selfrotation around
> > > its axis. Therefor its day would be 300 siderial years, while its year is
> > > as you state around 200 days. I can't find anything on laws for the
> > > rotation of planets around their own axis so I simple choose a value.
> > > Comments on this would be appriciated.
> > 
> > It seems a very great coincidence that a world would be so nearly at rest
> > with respect to the stars, given that no force is drawing it into that
> > rotation rate via e.g. tidal resonances or the like, and indeed solar
> > tides would tend to spin it up over time.  That's not to say it couldn't
> > happen, just that it'd be considered a significant oddity, with scientists
> > actively investigating how it got that way.
> 
> Well, like I said I just picked a large number to make its days really
> long. On the basis of your arguments I'll tone the number down but still
> keep it large, to like you said make it an anomaly that scientist would
> want to study.

An interesting idea would be to give the world a sidereal rotation period
just less than its year (like, say, 200 hours less).  This would indicate
a world which was very close to becoming tidally locked, but hadn't
actually reached locked rotation yet; this would also interest scientists,
but be easier to explain physically.  And it gives truly amazingly long
local days, like thousands of Terran days long.  In fact, the days would
be *much* longer than your scenario, in which the day is effectively equal
to the year length, as the planet holds one orientation while circling the
star.

> This is mainly for plot reasons. The mining operation is very high
> security, and with a scientist research station on the planet this
> security would be harder to maintain. I'm tinking of getting the
> characters involved in some way between this research station and the
> mining corp.

Perhaps the science station has a reserved region for study, including all
the crustal zone underneath it, and the mining company has found a rich
vein down there and is trying to sneak a tunnel through to mine it.  The
players are hired/asked by the scientists to help prove this is going on
so they can register a complaint with the world's Imperial administrator,
who's due for a visit on-world in a few weeks.

> > Wow, that's one dark planet!  Not surprised your temp came in 70 K higher.
> > The Moon is around albedo 0.04, IIRC; your world, which we've all presumed
> > would have significant surface ices, should be quite a bit higher, at
> > least 0.2 I'd think.
> 
> I know. I was thinking Mercury, but of course if its covered in ice, which
> it should be, the albedo will be significantly larger. I'll change that
> to, thanks.

No prob...world-building is one of my favorite hobbies, and I'm enjoying
this immensely.

- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
   |   Craig Berry - cberry@cinenet.net
 --*--    Home Page: http://www.cinenet.net/users/cberry/home.html
   |      Member of The HTML Writers Guild: http://www.hwg.org/   
       "Every man and every woman is a star."

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 10:18:38 -0700
From: Chris Griffen <cgriffen@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: CT, MT, TNE, T4 vs GURPS, revisited

Daniel Poulin wrote:

>I will purchase GURPS traveller.  I will shamelessly rip the ideas out of
>it and incorporate it in my own personal campaign.  I am looking forward to
>GURPS Traveller.

Although I strongly oppose the canon-breaking aspect of GT, I too will buy
it. Mostly because Loren is involved. I think he's written great Traveller
material in the past and I expect that his work will continue to be great.
However, I intend to metamorphose his world and scenario descriptions to
fit my TNE campaign. If my players should visit a place described in the GT
books, they will visit a place much like that described in GT, but with the
added history of the Rebellion, Collapse and New Era.

And, obviously, GURPS mechanics are out.

Best,

Chris Griffen

===================================================
Keeper of the Flame. Traveller player since 1980.

http://www.best.com/~cgriffen/traveller/deneb.shtml


- --------------------------------------------------------------
Christopher Griffen                      Phone: (408) 527-7189
Cisco Systems, Inc.                      Fax:   (408) 527-0452
NMBU Technical Publications              cgriffen@cisco.com

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 09 Sep 1997 13:27:56 -0400
From: Mark Urbin <eclipse@ultranet.com>
Subject: T:GURPS/Sword Worlds

Andrew Moffatt-Vallance <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz> types:
>Then there's the Sword Worlds question.
>Just how long will the artifical construct that the Imperium carved out of
>half of the Sword Worlds last? and just how far is the Imperium willing to
>go to preserve it?

   Ooohhhh...What a happy little hotbed of nasty stuff this can be! :-)
I was just considering this myself.  In my Traveller campain (TNE ruleset,
CT setting, Spinward Marches, *right* after the 5th FW), this is an issue.
The resistance movements, the stray SW military unit still running around,
the odd Government-in-Exile.


- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
eclipse@ultranet.com All Opinions are Mine. http://www.ultranet.com/~eclipse/
"Tension, apprehension and dissension have begun." -- Alfred Bester
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
- --

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 18:56:35 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: OH dear! not a 101 book.

What I forgot to mention is:

Timothy Collinson's 'The Traveller Bibliography' is also out.... slightly
more expensive, but a lot longer than normal 101 books, it details just
about every Traveller supplement you've heard of, and many that you
haven't, along with some notes and a recommendation.al to be sad and check
off all those things your Traveller library has, or hasn't. A very good
resource indeed.

<Wholeheartedly recommend>

<aside>
Tim, I'm sorry I forgot to mention it <grovel, grovel> BUT I DID BUY IT!
</aside>

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"Omnia Mutantur Nihil Interit"  -  Sandman 'The Wake'
"Everything Changes, but nothing is truly lost" 

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 19:55:32 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Bertil Jonell <d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1796

> From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
 
> Non-regular (tramp) ships usually only make two jumps per month, but the crew 
> usually lives on the ship while it is in port.

  I commonly use life support costs to 'chase' the PC's off their ship
and into a local hotel (and into the aegis of local law, local customs
and local trouble (ie adventure)) if they get too strong tendencies 
towards lets-just-make-money-by-spec-trade-and-avoid-all-entanglements.

- -bertil-
- -- 
"It can be shown that for any nutty theory, beyond-the-fringe political view or
 strange religion there exists a proponent on the Net. The proof is left as an
 exercise for your kill-file."

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 97 15:20:39 -0400
From: Derek Wildstar <wildstar@qrc.com>
Subject: Re: Thoughts on roleplaying

David Reed <david@techrefuge.com> wrote:
> On Monday, September 08, 1997 08:44, Derek Wildstar wrote:
> > of that half-elven enchantress scratches his beard
> 
> *rofl*  Do you have something against beards?

Nope; I have one myself.  They don't look natural on elves though (Cirdan
himself not withstanding).  Now a _dwarfish_ enchantress with a beard, well
that's another matter entirely, entirely within character ...

> > I've toyed with the idea of setting up a Traveller MU* (either MUCK or
> 
> I've had some experience with Diku/ROM and MUD++ [...]  I don't have any
> xp with LP or mucky-moo, so perhaps lib-based deals might work better.

I don't know a think about lib or DIKU based stuff; all my experience is
with MUCK and MOO.  The server code for MUCK is reasonably portable, and
even runs under NT (I think - the scarygothicbikerservercodingbatbat
might know for sure).

> > Periodically, the referee would disconnect the Azhanti's exits from the
> > rest of the database (a week in "jumpspace"), and a week later connect
> > them to a new destination system for exploring and adventuring.
> 
> Do you realize the amount of time involved in creating an entirely NEW 
> world every week?

Certainly not every week!  The point of jumping into a new system would be
to spend anywhere from weeks to months exploring the new system, and only
when its adventure possiblities were all tapped out, jumping to a new
system.  This would give the referee(s) several weeks or months to work on
the new adventure setting.

Also note that on a MUCK or a MOO (I don't know about the other servers),
it's perfectly possible for the referee(s) to be working on creating a new
area while the players are still exploring and solving the old one.  You'd
just have a week to change the linkages and @recycle the old planet while
the ship was in jumpspace.

You could also have locations that were used more than once: a starbase,
stardock, or a planet that was visited frequently.

> > Unfortunately, I don't have the time (or the server hardware) to try
> > this experiment.  It would be interesting, though.
> 
> I have the server, no time.

Now all we need is someone who can sell us some spare time; I could use
about 20 extra hours a week, maybe more.

> > There's a reason for trying a MUCK - I've seen code for a "terraform"
> > system for MUCKs.  This is an ingenious program for allowing the referee
> > to> define an entire planet (by creating a planetary map).
>
> Cookies!  Where's this code?  Any chance it could be ported as a 
> cartography program?

Not likely.  The code is a _LARGE_ MUF library (MUF is Multi-User Forth, the
programming language implemented on MUCK servers).  Porting it to something
else would be a bear, and most of the code handles people exploring the map
database (by creating and @recycling virtual rooms as people move accross
the map).  The overall technique only works on servers that support true
recycling (unlike MOOs, which just mark objects as deleted and don't recover
the database space).  It's a map-exploration program, not a map-making
program.


wildstar@qrc.com
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Prepare the Wave Motion Gun!

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 22:01:08 +0100
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller announced....

>SJ Games Announces GURPS Traveller

Great!!
I consider GURPS the best RPG system out there by far. Check out the
Vehicle design system, consistent, detailed and with RULES on how to use
all those nitty bitty details in gaming. Detailed tactical combatsystem
(heavily leaning towards fantasy swords  fights but thats OK), boring but
detailed char gen.

All Traveller referees should buy at least GURPS Vehicles (or Robots) and
Compendium II wether they will play with URPS rules or not.

Ooops - got a little overexcited didn't I?


/Anders Backman
Aniware AB
anders.backman@aniware.se

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1797
***********************************
Traveller-digest     Tuesday, September 9 1997     Volume 1997 : Number 1798



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: GURPS Traveller
Re: GURPS Traveller announced....
Re: GURPS Traveller
Re: Thoughts on roleplaying
Re: Post Convention Sale
RE: France in 2300AD (was Traveller-digest V1997 #1789)
Re: Plague of Duskir & Canon
[T97#1789] Plague of Duskir etc.
Re: CT, MT, TNE, T4 vs GURPS, revisited (LONG)
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1796
Traveller * Rob's Sensor Scam
Ordering CORE products
Re: GURPS Traveller
Replys
Re: Tech Levels
Jump Torpedos (was: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1792)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 22:10:16 +0100
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller

>Gurps Traveller is not really T5...I would call it T IV : )
>
>> This is of obvious interest to me and the other small GURPS cabal here on
>> TML.  I'm not sure how I feel about the alternate timeline deal, but it
>> should be interesting.
>
>Would this "small GURPS cabal" please get in touch with me? I have a few
>questions of a technical nature to ask (and a sneaky suspicion that my work
>for the next few weeks is cut out for me).
>
>Loren Wiseman

Consider yourself contacted/touched whatever...
(ie I'm interested in helping out with whatever needed for a Traveller-GURPS)


/Anders Backman
Aniware AB
anders.backman@aniware.se

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 22:12:34 +0100
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller announced....

>   Look, gloat if you must, but this doesn't mean anything any better
>than when IG took over the publishing rights.  Besides setting up the
>*mother* of all TML wars as the GURPS Traveller people and their CT
>allies fight it out with MTers, TNEers, and an assortment of canonists,
>you have the whole issue of GURPS Traveller and Marc Miller's Traveller
>fighting it out for shelf space at a game store near you.  Oh sure, I
>know what some have said about the two lines complimenting each other,
>but that's just plain rubbish.  Unless SJG plans an extremely limited
>run of Traveller materials (say a couple or three sourcebooks), in the
>end you'll have GURPS Traveller or nothing.
>
>   I hope I'm wrong, but....
>
>Regards,
>
>Harold

I hope you're right.


/Anders Backman
Aniware AB
anders.backman@aniware.se

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 22:10:15 +0100
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller

>I'm not sure I'm too keen on it (I like TNE), but it's going to be
>interesting to look at, as while I thought  GURPS Space was a well
>made product I didn't like its 'feel'. I've never been too keen on
>the (probably realistic) way sci-fi weapons in GURPS will kill you
>from even the most minimal hit if you've no armour, but sometimes
>can't hurt you if you have your armour on - and that's not a
>Traveller thing  in any edition I've played (ie CT, MT, TNE). Besides
>I'm not sure I like the mostality rate GURPS seems to encourage, or
>the way the more powerful characters all seem to start out as
>escapees from an asylum.
>
>R. Boleyn <gtrupert@iconz.co.nz>
>
>TNE to the Core

Don't forget the blowthrough rules in GURPS.
Makes those high tech gizmos somewhat less dangerous.


/Anders Backman
Aniware AB
anders.backman@aniware.se

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 09 Sep 1997 12:24:55 -0700
From: Evyn MacDude <wmacdude@Concentric.net>
Subject: Re: Thoughts on roleplaying

D.Moodie wrote:
> 
> You'd consider playing Diablo? Are you SICK?!?!
But it is Addictive.
- -- 
Evyn,
Warleader of the Clan MacDude
Yuppie Hunter of the Forgotten Surf
	Fortalice Desertum
	AD. 1997

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 15:59:21 -0500
From: "Kevin L. Kitchens" <peiprog@feist.com>
Subject: Re: Post Convention Sale

If you ever come across Double Adventure #4, Marooned alone, let me know! :)

Is there a central site to find used items for sale?

On  9 Sep 97 at 8:59, Niko Wieleba wrote:

 The Perfect Game - http://www.peiprog.com/PerfectGame
========================================================
 Serving enthusiasts of computer baseball simulations
========================================================

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 10 Sep 1997 08:55:39 +0000
From: "Rupert Boleyn" <gtrupert@iconz.co.nz>
Subject: RE: France in 2300AD (was Traveller-digest V1997 #1789)

> >Can any one name any ground war in europe that france didn't get raped in
> 
The French won, or drew most until Napoleon got beaten, and even the 
Franco-Prussian War (about 1867, IIRC) was a closer run thing than 
most realise.

> >Basically 2300 irked me because I had a hard time thinking the united
> >states would ever fall behind canada france and africa in industry ,
> >military , or space tech. even with WW3, also why is the american arm so
> >limited while everything cool is on then french arm . do any of you
> >people really think this would happen ? . seems to me that the author was
> >going out of his way to break conventional thinking on the future . 

150 years ago people said the same of England

R. Boleyn <gtrupert@iconz.co.nz>
Palmerston North
New Zealand

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 09 Sep 1997 13:05:41 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Re: Plague of Duskir & Canon

Phillip McGregor wrote

Hans Rancke-Madsen wrote

[massive snips]

> >>They *KNEW* what was likely to happen from this experience -- and it still
> >>boils down to the requirement that you believe the Terrans and Terran
> >>Military *DELIBERATELY* allowed the PoD to happen by making no preparations.
> >>There is no possible *economic* reason to allow this,
> >
> >Actually, there is. Transporting wealth between worlds takes cargo space. It
> >is actually much better for a Terran immigrant to  be able to take over an
> >empty appartment and a vacant job than to start with just what he could
> >carry along with him on the trip. (Actually, many Terrans propably stole
> >(in the most legal way possibly, of course) what they needed to establish
> >themselves. If their Vilani victims resisted that actively, getting rid of
> >some of them could be an attractive option. It's a vile idea, but people
> >have an amazing ability to rationalize vile ideas.
> 
> This simply doesn't make sense. Economically or morally.

I have been trying to stay out of this discussion but this makes it
somewhat difficult.

Many people respond to other people emotionally rather than rationally. 
When the government or the church depicts another group of people as
inferior they go along with this idea.  This tendancy is inflamed when
you have just been at war with these people.

Suppose you are a Terran.  You were born around the time of the First
Interstellar War.  As you grew up you heard of the wars going on.  You
heard that there was a strange human culture out there doiminating a
vast stellar empire.  You heard of older relatives dying in the wars
with these strange people, maybe you even lost a parent.  You heard that
they had already claimed most of the planets near Earth, even though
they were from hundreds of light years away.  You heard that their rigid
and repressive culture was stifling your peoples need for lebenstraum. 
This culture denied that your culture had invented the jump drive,
thereby calling your people liars.  When you came of age you enlisted in
the military, as did most of your friends (its hard to fight a war with
a culture outnumbering you by (at least) hundreds to one.  Your unit
suffered heavy casulties from these people.  These people slaughtered
prisoners of war _including_those_you_loved_, in contradiction of the
cultural "rules" of war you had grown up with.  As you grew older there
were breaks in these wars and you found time to have a family.  After
serving 20 or 30 years in the military you were getting a bit old for
such an active life and you retired to a civilian career.  Your children
went off to war with these people and some of them did not come back. 
Every night on the news vid for your whole life you heard stories of the
bad things these people did.  You lived a life that was less luxurious
than your parents or grandparents because the war needs had to take
first place.  You paid very high taxes your whole life to finance these
wars.  You accepted these taxes as the price of your freedom but it was
kind of sad that you could not even afford a simple vacation for your
family on those rare occasions you got home to see them.

Finally the wars end.  You are old and retired now.  You have lost your
family to the wars, those that have not been killed have been called
hundreds of light years away to occupy former enemy planets - you know
you will never see them again.  All you really have in life are the
memories of what these Villani have cost you and a small pension.  Then
you learn that these Villani are suffering from a plague.  These Villani
still outnumber the Terrans by hundreds to one.  They have a far
inferior understanding of medicine. They are dying right and left from
disease.  The government is considering doing something about this but
it would be hard and expensive.  You see some pictures of these Villani
dying and it sort of bothers you to see children suffering but it is
really more than Earth can deal with. 

Are you going to give up part of _your_ small pension to help save these
people who have killed your friends and family, people you have heard
bad stories about your whole life ?

Unless you are a saint you are going to say "No, we are not going to
help them."   

- -- 
 pnewman@alaska.net	Peter Newman 
- --------------------------------------------------------------
"I have been nothing but compassionate and understanding. I mean, all
you had to do was to admit you were wrong and I was right and everything
would've been fine." - Ivanova to Winters in Babylon5: "Divided
Loyalties"

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 09 Sep 1997 21:32:21 GMT
From: jeff.zeitlin@earth.execnet.com (Jeff Zeitlin)
Subject: [T97#1789] Plague of Duskir etc.

On Sun, 7 Sep 1997 15:10:36 -0400, Andrew Moffatt-Vallance
<a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz> wrote

>Lets take a pause and look at just what the PoD is in game terms. It is
>a plot device to explain how the Terrans could come to totally dominate
>the Ziru Sirka without being culturally extinguished by the massive =
weight
>of Vilani numbers. If we remove the PoD, then another plot device will =
be
>needed to explain just how the Terrans came to domiate and subvert a =
culture
>that outnumbered them at least several thousand to one. Thats one hell =
of
>a population gradiant to fight your way up.

I don't think you really need this, other that to say that the
Vilani socio-political system was stagnant and discouraged
progressiveness, whereas the Terran system promoted dynamicism,
personal freedom, and et cetera.  England certainly didn't
dominate the world in terms of population during its Imperial
heyday, yet the British Empire was certainly one of the most
successful ones in spreading British culture and attitudes over
most of the globe.

>So, the PoD is a part of canon, so the question is how believable is it?
>Could the Vilani have been devistated by Terran diseases? If so, why?
>Firstly, what was the Plague of Duskir? According to canon it was a =
large
>number of diseases that the Terrans carried with them and took fairly =
much
>for granted. We're talking things like measles, flu, the common cold, =
mumps,
>rubella and especially that wonderful illness doctors call non-specific =
viral
>infection. The important thing is that these are all viruses.

Interesting observation. And yes, this is important.  But for
measles, mumps, and rubella, there are vaccinations.  While they
are not cures, they _are_ generally useful in _preventing_ these
diseases.  Mass inoculation programs, assuming that you can get
sufficient quantities of vaccines to appropriate locations in
sufficient time, will help here.  And I expect that the Terrans
would have had provisions for dealing with this; hell, we're
talking about it even today, with respect to future space and
planetary probes that are expected to bring back samples.

>                                                              While the
>Vilani may well have encountered a number of bacterial infections =
before, the
>chance that they have encountered an alien virus that can infect humans =
is
>almost beyond belief. Why, because a virus hijacks the genetic =
reproduction
>mechanism of the cell it infects. Any alien life is almost certainly =
going to
>be fundimentally different on such a basic genetic level. An alien =
bacteria
>may well be able to infect and reproduce in a human, it is beyond belief=
 that
>an alien virus would be able to do so. I know that this means that =
Gateway
>is wrong. The solution to this is to take a big pen and were it says =
virus,
>cross it out and write in bacteria. A bacteria will work even better =
than a
>virus.

BUT: The Vilani have been doing the interstellar thing for a
couple of thousand years by the time they start trading blows
with the Terrans.  It is specifically called out that the Vilani
are generally incompatible with their world; this suggests that
the same could _not_ be said with respect to many of the other
human races that they encountered in that 2,000 or so years.
These other humans probably _would_ have encountered viri that
can "do" them; they would have been transmittable to the Vilani,
thus requiring the Vilani to learn from their subjects.  Rest
assured, by the time they start facing Terra, they will have some
experience on this score.

>Now on to the Vilani immune system. Given that they have spent 300,000 =
years
>in an environment which to all intents and purposes is sterile. Now, =
what
>happens to the human immune system if it is not needed for 300,000 =
years. It
>is going to weaken; no ifs buts or maybes, it will degrade; if only due =
to the
>lack of natural selection. But even more likely, it will degrade even =
further
>due to evolution. The immune system is an energy intensive system, those=
 who
>have a weaker immune system will have more energy to devote to other =
systems,
>therefore on Vland, those with weaker immune systems will actually have =
an
>evolutionary advantage over those with strong immune systems. Simple =
logic
>dicates that after 300,000 years of this, the Vilani immune system will =
be
>considerably weaker than that of the Terrans. So not only to the Vilani =
have
>no natural immunity to the diseases that make up the plague, their =
defense
>mechanism against any disease has been compromised.

I suspect that this can be mostly discounted by the time of the
wars with Terra.  If the immune system didn't adapt _fast_, there
would be no Vilani left to adapt, or to fight the Terrans.

>Next, lets cover the Vilani response. One can assume that the Vilani =
would
>have encountered some fairly vicious plagues early in their starfaring. =
And
>one can at the very least assume that the Vilani would have developed a
>system of quarantine to deal with them. They may have also developed =
some
>antibotics and the like, but this is not certain and is actually =
irrelevant
>since at the time of the PoD they have access to Terran medical =
technology.
>So why didn't the Vilani simply quarantine to stop the plague. Because =
at the
>time of the PoD, the Vilani weren't in charge any longer, the Terrans =
were.
>The only way to quarantine effectively would have been to ban the =
movement of
>Terrans to Vilani worlds (effectively quarantining the Terrans). It is =
not too
>far fetched to assume that the Terran rulers of the RoM lacked the =
political
>will to do this. It is unpleasant, but it is not unbelievable.

I suspect very much that it may have been politically impossible.
In a situation like this, Terra may well have felt it necessary
to install a military governor on each world, even if that
governor would end up doing nothing but looking at what the
Vilani administrators were doing and signing his OK to it.  This
Terran is going to have much contact with the Vilani
administrative castes, including the military administrators
(general officers and their staffs).  What's going to happen if
_these_ people start dying off due to unfamiliar (to the Vilani)
diseases?  You're going to have some _major_ problems, due to the
unavailability of the people on whom you are _most_ dependent,
especially in the early stages of consolidation.

>The other factor with the Terran response is the shear scale of the =
problem.
>We know that the Vilani did not have as good medical technology as the =
Terrans.
>Plus they are not constantly involved in a day to day battle with =
diseases.

Actually, by now they are.  Their immune systems may not be up to
"Terran Normal" standards, but they're not so out of it that
their immune systems would be totally ineffective.

>Assuming the Vilani do know how to manufacture vaccines, I think one can=
 be
>fairly safe in assuming that their facilities to do this will be very =
limited.

Not necessarily - although had you said "comparatively more
primitive (i.e., lower TL)" I'd have agreed.  Remember, the
Vilani are administering about 10,000 worlds at the time of the
Terran conquest.  They will have had some experience, and many of
the minor races would have, too, even before Vilani conquest.

>So to put it all together what have we got. We have the Vilani with a
>"defective" immune system encountering a class of pathogen they have =
never
>before encountered. We have the Terrans in control and unwilling to
>quarantine themselves to prevent the spread of the viruses; and we have
>insufficent resources to manufacture enough drugs and vaccines to stop =
the
>plague. As a plot device, this all seems very reasonable to me.

....and it becomes even more reasonable if you generally restrict
its spread to the upper echelons, who will have had more contact
with the Terrans.  In some areas, perhaps it will be more
widespread (those areas where Terrans started colonizing/
immigrating, for example), but the key is to make it difficult
for the Terrans to administer their conquests.

- --=20
Jeff Zeitlin
jeff.zeitlin@earth.execnet.com

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 14:53:40 -0700
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: CT, MT, TNE, T4 vs GURPS, revisited (LONG)

From owner-traveller@phaser.showcase.mpgn.com Mon Sep  8
>One last thing, please stop SJG from substituting his Tech levels for
>Travellers.

I wouldn't worry.  The GURPS TL progression is mearly the
the "default" or "suggested" and is routinely modified to
suit different settings.  Know I don't know where they
will come down on the differences in CT/MT/T4 tech levels,
but I am sure it will be some combination of one or
more of them.

______________________________
summers@alum.mit.edu

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 09 Sep 1997 17:47:10 EDT
From: lugh1@juno.com
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1796

>Yes and no.  From what I understand (its made clear in the 2300 AD 
>books, I believe), the background was a joint effort of many people all who 
>played a massive simulation to build it.  In addition, I bet it was pretty 
>unrealistic in the mid 1700s to say "In 200 years, the American Colonies are going 
>to be a world leader", and most would have said that that was pretty 
>unrealistic.
>
>Its a game, and a game that's been out of print for like 7 years or 
>something absurd like that, relax.  If America was involved in WW3 with limited 
>nuclear exchange, the U.S.ed be in a heap of trouble.  That's the way it goes.
>

you mean like all the trouble we had in the gulf ? 

1. warsaw pact equipment was and is far inferior [ TL 6 ] versus our
hardware [TL8]
    dureing the '80's the media had built up the soviets as a major
threat when infact the basic soviet troop is not trained to read a map
and the average soviet rifle company possess' one radio . [ I was trained
in soviet doctine and hardware in the army ] . soviet vehicles are made
of magnesium alloy [ they burn ] 

If the U.S were to mobilize and engage in world domination, sans nukes
the world would fall in under two years. 

now with this knowledge you may understand my comments.

>America's already falling behind in a number of ways, and we haven't 
>had a WW3 yet.

not in the fields of mil-tech or airo-space ..which are the ones that
would count in WW3

jim

------------------------------

Date: 09 Sep 1997 18:24 EDT
From: "Robert Eaglestone" <eaglesto@nortel.ca>
Subject: Traveller * Rob's Sensor Scam

Hello all -

I was driving back towards work after lunch, and thought about
last month's Traveller meeting.  There were only four of us,
so I decided to just do some ship combat for fun.  It took
forever, because none of us remembered how we did it last
Spring and we hadn't touched ship combat in the sessions
between.

What did us in was the sensor lock + to-hit determinations.
Too much stuff, and with seemingly random significance.  I
fondly remembered Classic Traveller, which didn't worry about
things like sensors.  But then I realized that sensor skill
and sensor packages SHOULD make a difference.  Then I started
wondering how I would design ship combat... (wavy fuzzy lines
denoting "mind's eye" perspective):


Dice to Roll == Range Band (VC=1, C, M, L, VL=5)
Target #     == Ship size class

And of course, an exceptional success (all 1's) is a success, no 
matter how low the target # is... and an exceptional failure 
(all 6's) is still a failure, no matter how high the target #...


SENSOR LOCK:
- ------------
+ sensor skill
+ active sensor rating
- - evader's jam sensor rating
- - evader's current max G rating


Examples:
- ---------
Attacker	Defender	  Range	Dice	Target #
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
sensor-2,A2	1000-ton, J8, 6G  M	3	9 + 2 + 2 - 8 - 6 = -1 (2)
sensor-2,A2 	1000t, J8, 6G	  C	2	9 + 2 + 2 - 8 - 6 = -1 (2)
sensor-4,A8	100t, J2, 2G      M	3	8 + 4 + 8 - 2 - 2 = 16-
sensor-4,A8	100t, J2, 2G	  C	2	8 + 4 + 8 - 2 - 2 = 16- (11-)



WEAPONS FIRE:
- -------------
+ gunnery skill
+ (anything else?)
- - what?  (I don't have the book with me)
  (max G?  Can you outrun a laser?)


Examples:
Attacker	Defender	Range	Dice	Target #
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
gunner-2	1000t		M	3	9+2 = 11-
gunner-2	1000t		C	2	      11-
gunner-4	100t		M	3	8+4 = 12- (11-)
gunner-4	100t		C	2	      11-


Implications of this Unamended House Rule:
- ------------------------------------------
Close and Very Close range, without significant negative DM's,
are almost guaranteed to work.  Is this realistic?  If not,
then would a simple fix solve the problem, such as adding one
die to roll for each range band?


Rob

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 09 Sep 1997 15:35:14 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Ordering CORE products

I keep hearing great things about the new stuff from CORE, but the web page
doesn't seem to believe in them.. is there a catalog somwhere that I can
grab these goodies?
- --
+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net   |
|          Proud Gearhead & Planetologist         |
|          http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|*************************************************|
|"Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day |
|  But when I follow at my pleasure the serried   |
|  multitude of the stars in their course, my     |
|  feet no longer touch the Earth."               |
|                   -Cladius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy) |
+-------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 10 Sep 1997 10:29:02 +0000
From: "Rupert Boleyn" <gtrupert@iconz.co.nz>
Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller

Anders Backman wroe:

> 
> Don't forget the blowthrough rules in GURPS.
> Makes those high tech gizmos somewhat less dangerous.

IIRC they only apply to bullets, not lasers or blasters. 


R. Boleyn <gtrupert@iconz.co.nz>

TNE to the Core

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 19:10:04 -0400 (EDT)
From: GDWGAMES@aol.com
Subject: Replys

Daniel Poulin" <pould@netcom.ca>
Subject: CT, MT, TNE, T4 vs GURPS, revisited (LONG)

> One last thing, please stop SJG from substituting his Tech levels for
> Travellers.

I don't see that I have a lot of choice in the matter...


David Reed <david@techrefuge.com>
Subject: The dread TIV virus (was RE: GURPS Traveller)

David Reed:

>On Friday, September 05, 1997 19:26, GDWGAMES@aol.com wrote:
>> > Gurps Traveller is not really T5...I would call it T IV : )
>
>Is that anything like HIV?

It is the letter "T" followed by the Roman Numeral IV ("four" to 
those of you who are Latin challenged). An alternate universe 
represented by an alternate numbering system -- qite a jest, eh what?
 I could have said it was T100 (am I getting binary for four correct?).

> * SJG will InvalidateRect the BEST milieu Traveller ever had!

Nobody's invalidating anything.

> Bring back the Rebellion and Hard Times!!!

They are not gone.

> Loren Wiseman

> Welcome back, Loren!  Whatcha been up to?

Mainly, I've been trying to earn a living. My continual inability to win $20 Million
in the Illinois lottery is a source of frustration to me. Perhaps if I bought a ticket?

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 19:35:13 -0500
From: Sebastien Normandin <luckyj@microtec.net>
Subject: Re: Tech Levels

I don't know exactly what's been said on this subject, so if I'm repeating
something someone else said, I appologise.

On the subject of low tech levels, I agree with the comment that there
isn't much room for variation there. The Trav tech level system seems more
heavily weighted on the high end, such that historical examples of tech
variation on Earth aren't represented by it. Tech Level 1, which someone
mentioned was pre-gunpowder, metal weapons tech, is what the Roman Empire
was. Except that their knowledge of concrete (some of which set
underwater), for example, was only equalled in Britain in the 19th century.
In terms of construction technology, they were highly advanced. Another
example of technological abberation is Hero of Alexandria, also living in
tech level 1 times, who invented a steam driven device used to open temple
doors. My question is whether there could be larger allowances for such
"technological abberations" in Traveller. I would imagine that this would
make for some very interesting design possibilities with reference to
planetary cultures and such. It seems so basic to the game that it
shouldn't be seen as so arbitrary. Consider, for example, the discussion on
Solomani biological and medical technology that took place on the list a
while back...

Which reminds me. Why wasn't the old tech level chart from CT reprinted in
the new T4 basic book? I've mentioned this before, but no one answered. A
couple of pages devoted to this, and the possibilities of "technological
abberation" in specific fields of endeavor would seem to be a useful thing
to include in any new edition of the rules.

Even if it were GURPS Traveller. :)



Sebastian Normandin

luckyj@odyssee.net

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 09 Sep 1997 19:40:52 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: Jump Torpedos (was: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1792)

Phillip McGregor writes:

>>>and Jump Torpedoes (Leviathan?). 
>>
>>I guess you don't recall that I designed a workable jump torpedo the last
>>time that particular bit of canon was discussed.
>
>Was it under 10 tons in displacement mass? Considering that MTrav and TNE both
>disallow JDrive capable vessels under 100 tons. And, if *you* remember, I also
>suggested a way that such a limitation could be worked around the last time such
>an argument was raised. But (AFAIR) the canoneers were up in arms against any
>such change (OK, OK, with *you* as an exception, granted).

   For the record TNE does in fact allow jump drives on craft smaller
than 100 tons.  IIRC, the lower limit in TNE is 10 tons.  There are
examples of less than 100 ton starships listed in the Regency
Sourcebook.

   As a practical matter (not dealing with storyline or mechanics
canon), jump torpedos as a weapon don't exist because they are just a
really bad idea.  Lanthum is suppose to be a semi-precious resource in
all versions of Traveller.  Jump drives as a rule are not cheap.  Also,
a lot can happen in a week--like news of a cease-fire or friendly forces
capturing the target world.  It is far more economical and militarily
wise to send in a ship equipped with serious stealth characteristics, a
black globe generator, lots of conventional thrust missiles, and a crew
who has more guts than sense to take out targets in an enemy held
system.

   This would not prohibit some techie down at the nearest Imperial
naval depot from proposing jump torepedos, and perhaps talking the
Imperial Navy into constructing a number of prototypes (perhaps even
enough to equip Leviathan) to see how they work as a real weapon. 
Having proven once again their impracticality (you have to figure this
happens every few hundred years or whenever there is an increase in TL),
the jump torpedos are disassembled and the project scrapped.

   Now jump torpedos as a *means of communication* have some merit.  I
seriously doubt you could convince someone after 1130 that they are a
good idea, but prior to that they would prove a cheaper alternative to
sending an X-boat.  On the other hand, they would have the same problems
that all systems without a human in loop have--what if something
unexpected happens?  You can only program in so many "what ifs" into a
non-sentient computer.  I don't need to tell you the problems associated
with using them for military communications (nothing like distributing
free copies of your subsector-wide battle plan to the enemy to put a
crimp in your glorious conquest of the galaxy).  I could easily see the
Imperial Scout Service deciding that the cost saving would not be worth
the inevitable loss in reliability in communications.

Regards,

Harold

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1798
***********************************
Traveller-digest   Wednesday, September 10 1997   Volume 1997 : Number 1799



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Visigoths, Vandals, and Cassandra Complex (was: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1789)
CT, MT, TNE, T4 vs GURPS, revisited (LONG)
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1796
Re: CT, Mega, TNE, T4, and then GURPS
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1789
Re: FF&S2-The Good, the Bad, and The Ugly
Re: FF&S2-The Good, the Bad, and The Ugly
G:Traveller
Re: The Gateway Book - Replies to Various Comments (LONG)
Request to Craig
Re: Tech Levels
Re: Jump in Traveller
Re: [T97#1789] Plague of Duskir etc.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 09 Sep 1997 19:42:26 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: Re: Visigoths, Vandals, and Cassandra Complex (was: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1789)

Phillip McGregor writes:

>>   Romulus Augustus will be deposed, and the charade of the western
>>empire will be over.   
>
>I'll have you know that all we did was *restore* the rightful (eastern)
>emperor's authority under a new Consul!

   Continuing the analogy...

   Thereby creating a new empire (Byzantium) that was Greek, not Latin.

>>   Oops!  wait no, that's the Roman Empire, anyway same sort of thing. 
>>As scary as it may seem, Mr. McGregor and I agree on another point. 
>>This whole concept does not bode well for IG.
>
>Why is it scary? Surely I'm not *that* much of a bogey-man ... and I don't even
>have (too many) tendrils on my head, either!

   Our differences on certain issues are...well known.  Generally when
we agree on something, that something bears very close examination,
since when we agree we're usually right.

   As for your tendrils, I found a wonderful cream that can take care of
the problem.  See?  <patting my head> Not even a bump...

>I'm not *necessarily* bashing TNE (though, believe me, I *could*!) I'm simply
>pointing out what seems to be obvious. GDW went bust, and with it, effectively,
>TNE and Virus. IG promised, at some unspecified future date, to do some sort of
>TNE background tie-up ...

   That, and support through Traveller Chronicle (disregarding those who
through individual effort are Keeping the Flame), is sufficent to
consider events after 1130 canon.  Now would I *love* to see somebody
else be allowed to produce new TNE sourcebooks (as in TNE, not a MMT
sourcebook dealing with New Era)?  Absolutely.

>but, let's get real here, do you *seriously* believe
>that IG has enough of a clue to last much longer before going belly up?

   Had Marc Miller not intervened and announced a major revision of
MMT?  Of course not.  Marc's intervention changed the equation.  IMHO,
introducing GURPS Traveller and SJG into the mix changes the equation
back to what it was before (actually it's more like throwing a 250 kg
gorilla into the room who promptly eats the math book).  While I'm not
happy with GURPS rules on principle (yes, I've read the basic manual),
I'm made even more unhappy by the implications of what comes next.

>Even if there was going to be *no* GURPS Traveller?

   Assuming no GURPS Traveller, IG continues to plod along, producing
new material for a while, never stepping on the storyline after 1116
because they never produce anything for it.  Until one day somebody pays
either IG or Marc Miller a sufficent bribe (call something else more
polite and it's still a bribe) and is allowed to put together something
official dealing with post-1116 events.

>You've seen all the comments about how game stores are shunning IG products
>unless they have been specifically ordered by customers? Don't look good.

   No, things don't look good at all.  But as I said above, the
intervention by Marc changes things (well it did anyway).

>So, I suspect, even if we end up with GTrav being the "one, true, Trav"
>you'll almost certainly get more RefCol/Regency stuff *eventually* ... and if
>you're good enough, you can probably convince SJ to let you write it (if and
>when).

   I do not share your optimism.  It is entirely possible that the GT
line will consist of just enough product to put IG out of business, but
not enough product to make a "GT: Rebellion" or "GT: New Era" sourcebook
possible (remember, this is going to be just one line of many they
produce).  Given the basic premise of the whole GT concept--1116 and
beyond with no Rebellion, there would have to be some *major* rethinking
on Loren Wiseman's part even if SJG were to devote a considerable amount
of their resources to GT production.

>Nope, I'm like most *AUSTRALIAN* Liberals (i.e. Conservatives) and Socialists
>(i.e. liberals). We don't need no steenking yankee politics down under in Oz!

   The analogy still holds.  Undoubtedly there are those amongst the
Liberals and Socialists in Australia who think of certain sections of
the Australian constitution as being a bit too "burdensome" for their
political agendas and are working toward ways to circumvent those
sections through less than constitutional means.  Should they be
successful, there seems little point in having a constitution at all.

>So we probably have more in common than you suspect!

   While you look forward to GT, or at the least are hopeful that yet
another fresh start will result in a product worthy of purchase, I see
the beginning of the end of Traveller as an independent game system. 
While you see an ever expending product line that may even include New
Era material, I see a limited product line that has no room for such a
publication.  While we may both agree on the possible (probable) demise
of IG, we disagree about what will happen next.  Given what I see
developing within the new paradigm, the best course for those who wish
to see large quantities TNE material (as in multiple sourcebooks) lay in
someone being allowed to license out or buyout the TNE copyright.

Regards,

Harold

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 20:27:30 -0400
From: "Daniel Poulin" <pould@netcom.ca>
Subject: CT, MT, TNE, T4 vs GURPS, revisited (LONG)

Wow people, I never thought I would get some of you to get so excited about
things.  Lets all take a deep breath, count to 1000 slowly and breath out
(those that are still alive that is... :-)).

What was in my original message was MY personal opinion on Traveller,
GURPS, and some of the background.  Those of you who like GURPS can play
it, I don't care.  Believe me, the thought that GURPS exists does not keep
me awake at night and I have other things to do than to hate something.  I
have a large collection of GURPS stuff and I believe the supplements for
the game are problably among the best produced for any game.  Some days
ago, one of the posters replied to me presenting his opinion on GURPS and
describing how I was wrong (Sorry I don't remember your name, I destroy
most messages from the TML since I get too many).  I noticed also that my
original message created a lively discussion and for that I am happy.

One of the purpose of the message was to indicate my support to both Loren
and Marc for what I think is a good move (God knows I have complained
against IG and its policies).  Although I will not use the GURPS books, I
think the game needs any help it can get (especially after the treatment is
has been getting from IG).  Any help, including SJG, is quite appreciated. 
I don't know any of the two (Marc or Loren), but I hope that the support
from old timers (that is the way I describe myself) would be appreciated. 
The game does not only exist for them, it must also answer some of the
things that we want, otherwise it will die.  In the past, many games were
created (ever heard of Albedo, Cyborg Commando, Time & Time Again, or
Universe to name a few?), all these games were written by people who liked
gaming and liked their own personal system.  Traveller, on the other hand,
appealed to a large number of people by combining elements of hard science
with space opera.  This is the combination that attracted me.  

Now to reply to some of the comments concerning my dislike

I don't like GURPS for multiple reason.  I believe the unremembered poster
(please forgive me) did demonstrate why I was right (in my own eyes: I am
in complete agreement with everything I say ;-)).  None of the following
comments are to be interpreted in a way to be insulting or challenging to
anyone else's opinion.  They represent the opinion of the writer only.  Any
insult is in the mind of the reader!! <grin>

Difference in creation of characters.

As I said before, Traveller is a character generation system, GURPS is a
character creation one.  While you might consider right for players to play
the same character over and over again, I assume that the purpose of
playing is to roleplay.  It involves being faced with different
personalities, views, advantages and disadvantages.  It also overcoming
poor stats when they are generated.  GURPS is a nice system for players
with imagination to create characters.  Most good roleplayers I know would
not create the same character over and over again.  However, others don't
do that.  We all know the player who will complain and abuse the smaller
points in order to obtain the most.  And no, the simple fact that the GM
can be tough is not the answer.

A set of rules is, ultimately, an agreement between individuals to a set of
conduct.  It is not a distatorship that exists for the enjoyment of the GM
only.  Even house rules have to be approved by the other players.  If not,
the group desintegrates.  It is exactly the same thing about allowing
players to do things or not.  It is quite preferable to answer a question
like: Why can't I do this? by "because the rules say so" instead than by
"because I don't want you to".  One implies a reliability on the policy
established (the rules) while the other indicates a personal decision by a
dictator (the GM).  An answer by an agreed set of rules always reduces
discussions and fights. 

I find a character generation preferable to a character creation system.  I
find it imposes more on players and, ultimately, creates more interesting
characters.  This is one of the reason why I didn't like the TNE character
creation system (or more precisely a mix between creation and generation)
while I liked CT, MT and T4.

GURPS is not very good with tasks.  The 3d6 roll is cumbersome.  I
preferred the MT system that created a better "curve" (on this I can be
proven wrong)  I like the modifiers in MT.  I think GURPS has the same
problems with favorizing tasks that T4 does.  At least, MT favours skills. 
I have always preferred MT on this issue. 

As to tech, I don't think anything comes close to TNE (FF&S is a wonderful
book).  Yes I did not like the absence of thruster plates, on the other
hand, TNE had wonderful feel to it.  Everything was part of a whole (the
system for weapons, ships and vehicles) was ultimately incorporated.  The
optional tech created a wonderful opportunity to introduce other things
into the game.  While I did not like the background of TNE nor the absence
of thruster, I did like its handling of tech.  Let me just mention that I
do use GURPS for some things (Swashbuckler is an example: I am preparing
for a convention in Ottawa this weekend), but I still dislike many aspects
of it.  For example, GURPS handles armor almost like AD&D (armor teleports
you out of the way (I know this is not completely true, but this is
sufficiently close to the truth for the purpose of my demonstration), it
does not differienciate between penetration and damage.  That is one good
point for MT, TNE or T4.

Yes I will miss the Rebellion.  Norris, hero of the 5th frontier war, is
not the same as Norris, Keeper of the Flame (or the man who named himself
Archduke).  I will miss the Regency (even (once again repeating myself) if
I hated the Virus).

I will purchase GURPS traveller.  I will shamelessly rip the ideas out of
it and incorporate it in my own personal campaign.  I am looking forward to
GURPS Traveller.

One last thing, please stop SJG from substituting his Tech levels for
Travellers.

Daniel Poulin
pould@netcom.ca

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 20:45:11 -0400
From: 34zbtxq@cmuvm.csv.cmich.edu (Susan M. Shock)
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1796

>As i see it, 1107 and a 1116 where Strephon isn't killed shouldn't be
>that much different from each other! So why contradict MT and TNE,
>when you can produce the same products, set 10 years earlier, and
>consistant with Traveller Canon?
>I'd favor a setting that remains consistant with Traveller Canon, as
>would most TML-members.

(sigh)

The reason they aren't setting it in 1107 is probably because that era has
already been done! And as for contradicting MT, this is an ALTERNATE
timeline. it doesn't contradict ANYTHING. It's a "what-if" scenario. By
taking the story in a different direction after 1116, they can examine what
MIGHT have happened if the "assassination" hadn't occured!

I think the concept of alternate timelines should be familiar to almost any
fan of science-fiction. If not, a few episodes of SLIDERS should suffice to
familiarize people with the concept...

Allen

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 20:42:49 -0500 (CDT)
From: Joseph "Chepe" Lockett <jlockett@io.com>
Subject: Re: CT, Mega, TNE, T4, and then GURPS

Harold, I'm surprised at you.  You've developed a hair-trigger TNE defense
mechanism.  For what it's worth, I am a great fan of TNE.  Two Origins
running, I got off work at the SJG booth (I am _not_ a staffer for them,
just an occasional volunteer) and bopped over to chat with Dave Nilsen and
tell him what a super job I thought he was doing.  For God's sake, I even
got him to SIGN the copy I bought of "Survival Margin": "To Joe -- thanks
for appreciating all the heartache that goes into this stuff." 

And for you to mount on your high horse, assuming that just because I
defend the artistic merit of the GURPS variant-timeline setting and the
adventuring possibilities therein then I must be against TNE and all it
stands for, strikes me as grossly offensive and intellectually lazy. 
Don't read into a message what isn't there. 

Quoth Harold Hale:
> Joseph "Chepe" Lockett writes:
> >Wasn't Norris a great enough hero in the Fifth Frontier War? [etc.]
>
>    You also seem to have an attitude that "you'd better off tossing all
> that Rebellion and Virus crap and sticking with the regular Imperial
> setting."  Not everyone shares your view.

Damn straight.  *I* don't share the views you're tarring me with.

- ----------------------------*------------------------*------------------------
 Joseph L. "Chepe" Lockett  |"Nullum magnum ingenium | GURPS fan, Amiga user,
http://www.io.com/~jlockett | sine mixtura dementiae | Shakespearean scholar,
  Email: jlockett@io.com    | fuit." -- Seneca       | actor and director.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 09 Sep 1997 21:37:47 -0400
From: Daniel Ray Lane <drlane@pinn.net>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1789

Pascal Saradjian wrote:
> 
> Hello Travellers.
> 
> I am a French player.=20
> 
> In French, we play at many RPG with USA Hegemony. Why Not ?
> 
> In 2300 AD, the french have an important part in the background (and not =
> "rulings the world"). Why Not ?
> 
> (Sorry for my bad english)
> 
> Pascal Saradjian

Salut!

Ah, Oui, mais ce n'est pas de probleme.  Excusez-moi aussi pour ma
pauvre 
Francais. :)

J'aime l'idee de la Troisieme Empire Francais, parce que c'est 
different et interesante.

Probablement, les Etats Unis ne serais pas un "superpower" apres 2100.

Au revoir.

- -Dan Lane

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 09 Sep 1997 21:25:23 -0500
From: Sam Thomas <sinbad@dfw.net>
Subject: Re: FF&S2-The Good, the Bad, and The Ugly

At 06:01 PM 9/9/97 -0600, "David J. Golden" <goldendj@pcisys.net> wrote:
>At 11:00 pm 09/08/97 -0500, Sam Thomas wrote:
>>Also the Computer CP to CSC conversion is a MMT Black Book One "CANON
>>BUSTER" ie TL 5 culture can have a computer with a Computational Rating of
>>a FIVE!! 
>>
>>MMT Black Book One, page 64 states the Computational Rating for a given TL
>>is TL-7(TL-6 for Imperial Intelligence).
>>
>>Clearly the computers in the FF&S2 are not in sync with MMT at all, they
>>are still direct holdovers from FF&S1.
>
>	Assuming you're referring to Central Supply Catalog, the issue about CR
>was raised, discussed, and set aside. Part of our explicit guidance going
>in was that CSC _should_ have been more compatible with FF&S1, that FF&S1
>should be taken as the primary guidance (BTW, that _wasn't_ my idea ...),
>and that disconnects would have to be accepted. There was no other way to
>reconcile QSDS/SSDS and the VDS to provide a consistent, end-to-end design
>system. Any way you cut it, there would be disconnects between
>previously-published material.

Well CSC is right in line with Mark Miller's traveller in regards to CR's
on computers, it is FFS1 that is out of sync.

>	Believe me, I agonized over the computer part. I wasted over an entire day
>trying to fit curves to the computers presented in CSC, trying to come up
>with something that would both fit in with CSC, and present some useable
>numbers for starships. I _liked_ the idea of Computational Ratings as given
>in CSC. It's a good idea. But I couldn't come up with something rational
>that stayed together with CSC. I'm happy I came up with a fairly simple way
>to keep CRs. But I wasn't able to stick with the TL limits given there, and
>still have a good number to use in calculating controls without rewriting a
>lot more. As it is, I think things would have been immensely better if I'd
>used that day and a half improving other portions of the book.

I too like the computational ratings, but I will try and spend more than a
day to resolve the computer FUBARs.

>	Justify it, if you like, by assuming that the computers presented in CSC
>are consumer items, and subject to the TL-7 limitation, while the ones in
>FF&S2 are MILSPEC, internally redundant, fault-tolerant, self-checking,
>space rated systems.

Sorry but why would any one have a home computer when they can get a space
computer, Sorry David but that was too weak a response that I would have
expected from you. 

As it is right know the FFS2 CSC Computational conversions breaks "serious
canon" from the T4 first book. Right now imperial intelligence can not have
a CR 5 computer at TL-5 but any starship can.!!!!!!!!

>	Can't help with specific page references, I still don't have my copy, and
>I'm not sure where my draft files are currently backed up. I'll try to come
>up with something.

I found them on page 17 way before the pages dealing with stealth, and
masking.

You need to get you a copy there will not be any second edition or printing.

>>Why do the controls types have to locked into the TL of the ship, my car
>>has a TL 8 IC engine ignition system but a TL5-6 Dash display ie
>>speedometer and *idiot* lights.
>
>	Frankly? Because it's easier that way, than trying to have a massive
>matrix showing vehicle speed, flight regime, operator skill, drive type(s),
>other electronics, etc. correlated vs. minimum control TL.

Dave that sounds like a cop out from all of the effort that went into the
chemically propelled firearms details.


- -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
(c)1997 Sam Thomas  |Email:sinbad@dfw.net|
Sinbad Sam, Owner and Operator of Sinbad Sam's Saloon 
Chief Weapons Designer For Reddkneck Arms and Munitions
- -----------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 09 Sep 1997 21:36:32 -0500
From: Sam Thomas <sinbad@dfw.net>
Subject: Re: FF&S2-The Good, the Bad, and The Ugly

At 06:01 PM 9/9/97 -0600, "David J. Golden" <goldendj@pcisys.net> wrote:
>At 11:00 pm 09/08/97 -0500, Sam Thomas wrote:
>>Also the Computer CP to CSC conversion is a MMT Black Book One "CANON
>>BUSTER" ie TL 5 culture can have a computer with a Computational Rating of
>>a FIVE!! 
>>
>>MMT Black Book One, page 64 states the Computational Rating for a given TL
>>is TL-7(TL-6 for Imperial Intelligence).
>>
>>Clearly the computers in the FF&S2 are not in sync with MMT at all, they
>>are still direct holdovers from FF&S1.
>
>	Assuming you're referring to Central Supply Catalog, the issue about CR
>was raised, discussed, and set aside. Part of our explicit guidance going
>in was that CSC _should_ have been more compatible with FF&S1, that FF&S1
>should be taken as the primary guidance (BTW, that _wasn't_ my idea ...),
>and that disconnects would have to be accepted. There was no other way to
>reconcile QSDS/SSDS and the VDS to provide a consistent, end-to-end design
>system. Any way you cut it, there would be disconnects between
>previously-published material.

Well CSC is right in line with Mark Miller's traveller in regards to CR's
on computers, it is FFS1 that is out of sync.

>	Believe me, I agonized over the computer part. I wasted over an entire day
>trying to fit curves to the computers presented in CSC, trying to come up
>with something that would both fit in with CSC, and present some useable
>numbers for starships. I _liked_ the idea of Computational Ratings as given
>in CSC. It's a good idea. But I couldn't come up with something rational
>that stayed together with CSC. I'm happy I came up with a fairly simple way
>to keep CRs. But I wasn't able to stick with the TL limits given there, and
>still have a good number to use in calculating controls without rewriting a
>lot more. As it is, I think things would have been immensely better if I'd
>used that day and a half improving other portions of the book.

I too like the computational ratings, but I will try and spend more than a
day to resolve the computer FUBARs.

>	Justify it, if you like, by assuming that the computers presented in CSC
>are consumer items, and subject to the TL-7 limitation, while the ones in
>FF&S2 are MILSPEC, internally redundant, fault-tolerant, self-checking,
>space rated systems.

Sorry but why would any one have a home computer when they can get a space
computer, Sorry David but that was too weak a response that I would have
expected from you. 

As it is right know the FFS2 CSC Computational conversions breaks "serious
canon" from the T4 first book. Right now imperial intelligence can not have
a CR 5 computer at TL-5 but any starship can.!!!!!!!!

>	Can't help with specific page references, I still don't have my copy, and
>I'm not sure where my draft files are currently backed up. I'll try to come
>up with something.

I found them on page 17 way before the pages dealing with stealth, and
masking.

You need to get you a copy there will not be any second edition or printing.

>>Why do the controls types have to locked into the TL of the ship, my car
>>has a TL 8 IC engine ignition system but a TL5-6 Dash display ie
>>speedometer and *idiot* lights.
>
>	Frankly? Because it's easier that way, than trying to have a massive
>matrix showing vehicle speed, flight regime, operator skill, drive type(s),
>other electronics, etc. correlated vs. minimum control TL.

Dave that sounds like a cop out from all of the effort that went into the
chemically propelled firearms details.


- -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
(c)1997 Sam Thomas  |Email:sinbad@dfw.net|
Sinbad Sam, Owner and Operator of Sinbad Sam's Saloon 
Chief Weapons Designer For Reddkneck Arms and Munitions
- -----------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 10 Sep 1997 12:36:11 +1000 (EST)
From: "D.Moodie" <dmoodie@st.nepean.uws.edu.au>
Subject: G:Traveller

> GT Setting

Don't you think SJG has used a alternative timeline so that much of the
CT vs. MT vs. TNE vs. T4 bickering can be avoided?

Oh, but now it's going to be CT vs. MT vs. TNE vs. T4 vs. GURPS bickering
instead. The best option would be to take what you like and keep your
flamewars to yourself everyone (please, somebody start up a TNE and
Gurps:Traveller list)... 

Now for my 0.02 $AUS - I only use TNE because it is the most consistent
version available in a small number of cheap (compared to T4) books with
clear, concise errata - I've fixed all my books using a pencil and the odd
stuck in paragraph). Sure the setting is not the best, but I've always
regarded Traveller by its excellent mechanics and wealth of options rather
than branding it by its setting (this is not a White Wolf Games product
everyone) which in the end can be completely ignored if you wish. The fact
is Traveller (any version) does a better job at generic SF roleplaying
than any other system. GURPS Traveller might just open a few GURP-ite eyes 
as to how SF should be played.

								D.Moodie

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 10 Sep 1997 11:10:09 +0800
From: "Benjamin Barton" <aramis3d@iinet.net.au>
Subject: Re: The Gateway Book - Replies to Various Comments (LONG)

 
> >Originally, 3G3 was _supposed_ to be the weapons design system for T4, 

Where did you get this information from, as I have collected the last 3
versions of 3G(Guns Guns Gun),it was not made for T4, it was made for
Timelords with conversions to other systems, hell we made it fit Harnmaster
and among my friends its is the bible for gun design.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 09 Sep 1997 23:12:52 -0400
From: Thomas Walter Trelenberg <tomt@scri.fsu.edu>
Subject: Request to Craig

************************************
No prob...world-building is one of my favorite hobbies, and I'm enjoying
this immensely.

- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------
   |   Craig Berry - cberry@cinenet.net
 --*--    Home Page: http://www.cinenet.net/users/cberry/home.html
   |      Member of The HTML Writers Guild: http://www.hwg.org/   
       "Every man and every woman is a star."

- ------------------------------
***********************************

Great....would you mind giving a brief tutorial???

What is tidaly locked and what does it imply?

How does a world get tidally locked?

You or someone else mentioned that somehow tides could somehow start a
planetary rotation or make it stop....How does this occure.

Your right....its terriblly interesting!!! Unfortunately, I don't know
the first thing about it.  Could I convince you to use some of the above
mentioned enthusiasm to edify the entire list !!!!! ;->  !!!!!

Pretty Please!!!

Thanks

TT

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 23:14:07 -0800
From: Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca>
Subject: Re: Tech Levels

>>TECH LEVEL GROUPS
>>        TL      Title
>>        0       Nomadic
>>        1 - 3   Agrarian
>>        4 - 6   Industrial
>>        7 - 9   Planetary
>>        10 - 12 Stellar
>>        13 - 15 Nucleonic
>>        16 - 18 Galactic
>
>What's "nucleonic" mean, dude?

Well, the term is non-canon, but I use it to mean the ability to manipulate
nuclear forces in the way we can manipulate electronic forces today. I
figured this would be required to create bonded superdense armor or tunable
X-ray lasers.

Unfortunately those things show up a TL 14, not 13 as I have them. Tech
Level groups were given in multiples of 3, and technical potential doesn't
break down so easily. For example, I wanted to make an "Atomic" group, but
that starts at TL 6, which is at the tail end of one group. I guess a
better idea is to pick the technologies first and the groups second. How
about this:

TECH LEVEL GROUPS
	TL	Age
	0	Pretechnological
	1 - 2	Mechanical
	3 - 5	Industrial
	6 - 8	Atomic
	9 - 10	Fusion
	11 - 13	Gravitic
	14 - 16	Nucleonic

I actually like this better because it's descriptive and you can actually
test when a society has reached a particular group. For example, creating a
nuclear explosion will put a society into the Atomic Age, thruster plates
put you in the Gravitic Age.

>There are, at least on Terra, TL-0 agrarian societies, as well as TL1+
>nomadic ones.  The lower end of the TL scale has always been a little
>over-simplified for my taste.

True. In fact I can imagine a TL 15 nomadic society. I think the idea of
tech level groups *is* to simplify the TL progression a little, to make it
more descriptive. My mistake was trying to combine social and technological
advancement into one table. Just because a society has the technology, for
example, of interstellar travel doesn't necessarily mean that they'll do it.

I didn't like the proposed "Hi Tech", "Very High Tech", "Ultra High Tech",
etc. progression because it seems no more descriptive than a numeric tech
level. I think my proposed groups describe the differences in tech
qualitatively more than quantitatively. Also I think describing a planet as
"late Atomic" sounds cooler than "TL 8". Your opinion may differ.

- --
Richard Hough
rdhough@orca.bc.ca

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 23:01:22 -0800
From: Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca>
Subject: Re: Jump in Traveller

>	The 100 Diameter Sphere. Jump uses a straight line in calculating
>courses.
>If that straight line intersects a 100 diameter sphere around an object, the
>ship is "precipitated out" of jump space. It is an astrogator=92s job to
>plot a
>course which avoids these pitfalls (Notice that this prevents a ship from
>emerging from jump within another object).

What happens if I plot a Jump 6 route which intersects my target planet 1
parsec away. Do I get precipitated out at my target in just over 1 day?
What happens to a ship that gets "precipitated out" anyway? If it's not too
bad everybody will be using this trick.

On the other hand, since interplanetary space is full of hydrogen atoms, I
may get precipitated out before my ship has traveled a centimeter.

I don't like the idea of ships in J-space actually following courses in
N-space which somehow interacts with N-space objects; it leaves a loophole
for ships in jump to use this to communicate with, attack, or be attacked
by other objects in N-space or in jump. Jump drive begins to look like Star
Trek's warp drive.

I assume the "100 diameter" is an abstraction and the actual limit is
determined by a gravity gradient. Otherwise the ship could lift off the
ground and jump because the planet is just a bunch of atoms and you are
more than 100 diameters away from any atom in the planet. How about
figuring out the intensity of gravity 100 diameters away from a typical
planet, saying that is the jump limit, then helpfully noting that this is
"approximately 100 diameters" away from the planet. This fixes the 'running
into interstellar hydrogen' problem too.

Also, what are the probabilites a ship misjumps or has drive failure? I
don't like the misjump figures in T4 because they make it almost impossible
for any ship or crew to survive even a single term.

>	Comm: Commercial and private ships using standard drives.
>	Mil. Military ships in service.
>	T&T. Trained and tuned. Military ships with highly trained crews and
>carefully tuned drives.
>	Perfect. If the rolls produce a perfect jump +/- 0, reroll on the
>Perfect
>column.

These need to be defined. How does the jump drive know it's on a "military"
ship? Is the drive physically different? What exactly does a ship need to
be "trained and tuned"?  Is there any way for players or commercial ships
to do this? There are cases when shaving even a few hours off your travel
time would be advantageous; maintaining a "trained and tuned" ship should
be expensive or everyone would be doing it. My suggestion is to drop
special "military" drives and just say military ships are all T&T.

I like the idea of the ships in a fleet arriving within several hours of
each other; it means the admirals have to use strategy to prevent the first
ships from being picked off as they arrive (eg. sending the biggest ships
first, or jumping to a rally point distant from the actual target) and
can't just rely on outnumbering their opponents. It also means individual
ships can react faster than a fleet. This has good game and dramatic
potential (should the first ship out of jump chase after the bogey which
may be an early-warning scout or risk waiting for the rest of the fleet in
case they're outgunned?).

These jump rules are good. They just need a bit more detail.


- --
Richard Hough
rdhough@orca.bc.ca

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 22:56:33 -0500 (CDT)
From: Joseph "Chepe" Lockett <jlockett@io.com>
Subject: Re: [T97#1789] Plague of Duskir etc.

Excellent comments, Jeff, on Terran cultural dynamicism giving as much
leverage as favorable population ratios would, and on the severity of
plagues primarily affecting upper-echelon officials in contact with the
Terran invader.  However, and I hate to sound like a broken record:

Quoth Jeff Zeitlin:
> It is specifically called out that the Vilani are generally incompatible
> with their world; this suggests that the same could _not_ be said with
> respect to many of the other human races that they encountered in that
> 2,000 or so years.  These other humans probably _would_ have encountered
> viri that can "do" them; they would have been transmittable to the Vilani,
> thus requiring the Vilani to learn from their subjects.

Assume every minor-human homeworld hosts life whose genetic structure is
based on DNA -- it seems a fairly robust molecule, and we certainly
haven't found any counterexamples yet....  :-)

Nevertheless, I seem to recall that human DNA codes for about twenty
different amino acids (out of scores, some used by other organisms on our
own planet and others not).  Each amino acid is specified by three base
pairs on the DNA strand, in a code not based on fundamental laws of the
universe, but purely on chance and evolutionary heritage.  What are the
odds that a completely alien ecosystem, of totally separate lineage, will
have the same coding scheme and the same amino acids employed, let alone
the same cell-membrane receptors and transport systems, etc.?

Virii are going to be completely new and exotic to the Vilani in a
"hard-science" Traveller universe.  Bacteria, yes, they will have met and
dealt with.  But the prospect of an organism which can hijack their own
cells to reproduce itself and lurk inside their own genetic code, should
prove a thought unworthy even of their most fevered Eneri Allen Poe.... :-)

- ----------------------------*------------------------*------------------------
 Joseph L. "Chepe" Lockett  |"Nullum magnum ingenium | GURPS fan, Amiga user,
http://www.io.com/~jlockett | sine mixtura dementiae | Shakespearean scholar,
  Email: jlockett@io.com    | fuit." -- Seneca       | actor and director.

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1799
***********************************
