Traveller-digest       Friday, August 13 1999       Volume 1999 : Number 953



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Comment on GT Stuff?
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #952
Re: What's the News on T5?
Re: Fashion victims of the pack (was re: People's Republic of Berzerkely)
OT:  Another Blair Witch Reference
Re: first contact 
Re: What's the News on T5?
Re: <no comment> 
Re: <no comment> 
Re: What's the News on T5?
Re: What's the News on T5?
Re: What's the News on T5?
Re: What's the News on T5?
Re: AAFES (was: Re: PRB)
re: leonard's reply to star question Long
Iron Chef
Re:First In
Re: Reprint CT (Was Re: News on T5)

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

Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1999 08:57:21 -0600
From: "Christopher B. Thrash" <thrash@io.com>
Subject: Re: Comment on GT Stuff?

>Date: Wed, 11 Aug 99 14:41:34 -0500
>From: "Eris Reddoch" <eris@pcola.gulf.net>
>Subject: Re: Comment on GT Stuff?
>
>?Starships?  
> This is supposed to be the GURPS:  Starship Operator's Manual.  I
> haven't seen the beta yet, so it's a ways off.  It'll have to be
> *very* good to match SOM.

Noted -- I'm the author/compiler.

Actually, I think of GT: Starships as more like Traders and Gunboats, with
some Book 2/High Guard stuff thrown in. SOM is Forbidden Canon for GT
authors, but I'm trying to cover some of the same ground from GDW sources.

The book isn't due out until next year, but (new job permitting) I intend
to submit the draft well in advance, to allow plenty of time for playtesting.

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

Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1999 20:27:54 -0500
From: "William Barnett-Lewis" <wlewis@mailbag.com>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #952

 
HEY now, gotta remember the influence of ol' Kurt Le May there - as was with
SAC, anything that might go into the belly of a flight crew member had to be
above average. This was that racist bastard's only really good point (and
before you try to kill me - he was _our_ racist bastard. Good enough for me,
as far as it goes...)

He took very good care of all of the flight crew. As a ground pounder in the
Armor Corps, I would have happily gone to hell for the LtCln's who even came
close to what Le May did daily. I also thank Gue that I never had to uphold
that puppies ideology...

(What? Contradiction? Just 'cause I was the token lefty in 99.9998% of my
units????)

F*** the B****hit; life is all that matters.

William

> Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1999 10:03:03 PST
> From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
> Subject: Re: AAFES (was: Re: PRB)
>
> In mail you write:
>
>> On Wednesday, 11 August 1999 12:16, Black ICE [SMTP:wombat@premier.net]
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> During Operation JUST CAUSE, our site at Empire Range had a gut truck
>>> coming by daily, starting on D+6.  AAFES food is better than MREs....
>>
>> Yeah, in the same way that ebola is better than the bubonic plague...
>
> Hey! As a former "dependent" I resent these slurs.
>
> Of course, my experience was limited to the facilities at Fairchild AFB
> in the 60s and early 70s. And this was as "dependents of retired
> personnel". So we lived in Spokane, but visited the base to get stuff
> cheap.
>
> The food in the cafeteria in the back of the exchange was pretty good.
> We *really* kicked ourselves when, after watching a movie at the base
> theater and commenting on "Darn, it's to late to hit the exchange for a
> snack" someone piped up and told us there was a small 24 hr snack bar
> down on the flight line.  It turned out to be pretty good. And we'd
> been ignorant of its existence for years. <sigh>
>
- --
Live without fear; your Creator loves you     | William Barnett-Lewis
as a mother. Go in peace to follow the good   | mailto://wlewis@mailbag.com
road and may God's blessing be with           |
you always.                                   |
St. Claire                                    |

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

Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 13:38:23 +1200
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Re: What's the News on T5?

Date sent:      	Thu, 12 Aug 1999 17:48:56 +0100
From:           	SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>

> Well, the T4.1 / T5 playtest draft I have seems to be very much a fixed and
> updated T4.

> I disagree with your opinion on T4; I believe the execution was flawed,
> rather than the concept. The manuals were badly playtested, poorly laid out
> but it did have the distinction of having one of the fastest and most
> effective combat systems in a Traveller game, plus a skill system that
> works with the T4.1 fixes (which are actually on the T4 refs screen).

I agree. I found the core T4 system to be excellant. My biggest grip was
always the skills vs stats argument, but that seems to have been fixed
with the "Its Harder Than I Thought" (IHTIT) rule. With the IHTIT rule, the
system works wonderfully. For me T4 was able to recapture the simplicity
of CT and add in the smooth playability of MT.

Where T4 always fell down was in production and Travellers traditional
competing design systems. Hopefully with IG out of the picture and
adequate production checking this should not be a problem. I for one
really hope T5 is a product improved T4.

And BTW, I've found that with a little work, the playtest versions of T5
mechanics do work well as a generic system. I've managed to produce
a T5 magic system (as yet untested) for fantasy games and the
mechanics also worked well in a modern conspiracy game I ran.


Andrew etc
http://users.netaccess.co.nz/amv/
    Listening to way to much Dave Brubeck

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

Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 11:00:24 +1000
From: "Alan Bradley" <alanb@elf.brisnet.org.au>
Subject: Re: Fashion victims of the pack (was re: People's Republic of Berzerkely)

> From: Walter Smith 

> Goghuez says:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>         Oh, and by the way...   I wouldn't be caught dead in a had with
> strobe lights...  that was out of fashion last year.  It's soft red and
rust
> phosphorescent inset panels in cuffs, collars and hat brims that are all
the
> rage on Lair right now....
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> Responded to by Ghvourgh, a vargr Corsair:
> Oh, so those dead-scents on lair have a monopoly on fashion now?
> Of course strobes are out, but you're still using phosphorescence
> when you can get enhanced iridescence instead? 
> And *everyone* knows that the proper way to do cuffs is puffed,
> wide stripes, and **buttons!!!**

From Ouzo:
The key question is how fast the stripes move in your tartan.  More than
about 30 cm per Imperial standard hour is pretentious.  Of all the tartans
available, I prefer the Imperial Vargr Marine Tartan, whose predominant
colour is maroon.  Of course, it is inappropriate to wear green headgear
with that, unless you are a Commando veteran.

Alan Bradley
alanb@elf.brisnet.org.au

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

Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1999 21:16:41 -0500
From: Black ICE <wombat@premier.net>
Subject: OT:  Another Blair Witch Reference

Given that this OT subject attracted so much interest on the TML, I
figured that I would forward the URL for the Brunching Shuttlecocks'
review of the film:

http://www.brunching.com/selfmade/selfmade-blairwitch.html

For those of you who don't regularly check the Brunching Shuttlecocks
Web site, I heartily recommend it.

http://www.brunching.com/

- -- 
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776

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

Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1999 22:15:48 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@accesstoledo.com>
Subject: Re: first contact 

> Howdy!
> 
> > "Keven R. Pittsinger" wrote:
> > > 
> > > > >>>Canon? Hell I use Vulcans myself!
> > > > >>>
> > > > >> I just wonder what the first contact scenario for Aslan and Kzinti would
> > > > be like...
> > > > >
> > > > >Duelling hairballs?
> > > > >
> > > > Why am I hearing the soundtrack for Deliverance?
> > > 
> > > As sung by Bill the Cat?
> > 
> > With the Stray Cats playing backup....
> > 
> Of course, the banjos will be strung with...

Hiver guts and K'kree fur.

Keven

- -- 
tc++ tm+ tn t4- to ru++ ge+ 3i c+ jt au st- ls pi+ ta+ he+ so- vi zh sy
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

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

Date: Thu, 12 Aug 99 21:47:54 -0500
From: "Eris Reddoch" <eris@pcola.gulf.net>
Subject: Re: What's the News on T5?

On 08/13/99 at 01:38 PM,  "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz> said:

>> Well, the T4.1 / T5 playtest draft I have seems to be very much a fixed and
>> updated T4.

If Marc *is* making big changes, I'm sure he'll drop us a line.
Heck, I'm sure he'll tell us if he *isn't* making big changes.

>> I disagree with your opinion on T4; I believe the execution was flawed,
>> rather than the concept. The manuals were badly playtested, poorly laid out
>> but it did have the distinction of having one of the fastest and most
>> effective combat systems in a Traveller game, plus a skill system that
>> works with the T4.1 fixes (which are actually on the T4 refs screen).

>I agree. I found the core T4 system to be excellant. My biggest grip
>was always the skills vs stats argument, but that seems to have been
>fixed with the "Its Harder Than I Thought" (IHTIT) rule. With the
>IHTIT rule, the system works wonderfully. For me T4 was able to
>recapture the simplicity of CT and add in the smooth playability of
>MT.

...and that darn d3 at Difficult?  So, shoot me!  Having that *1* d3
in the task system just twists my shorts.

BTW, would you review the IHTIT rule for me?  I remember the
discussion starting, heck I remember being involved in it, but I
think I missed the final result due to internet static.

>Where T4 always fell down was in production and Travellers
>traditional competing design systems. Hopefully with IG out of the
>picture and adequate production checking this should not be a
>problem. I for one really hope T5 is a product improved T4.

>And BTW, I've found that with a little work, the playtest versions of
>T5 mechanics do work well as a generic system. I've managed to
>produce a T5 magic system (as yet untested) for fantasy games and the
>mechanics also worked well in a modern conspiracy game I ran.

I guess, I'm one of the weird people that liked the concept of
adding 1 more die for each level of difficulty.  I even made myself
several d3's, and though I didn't *like* them, I was prepared to use
them.  However...

  1.5 Easy
  2.0 Average,
  2.5 Difficult
  3.0 Formidable
  3.5 Staggering
  4.0 Impossible

...made Formidable tasks easy and Impossible tasks anything *but*
impossible for a lot of PC's !  <sigh>

The last I saw Marc's revision for T4.1/T5 was...

 1   Easy
 2   Average
 2.5 Difficult
 3   Formidable
 4   Staggering
 5   Impossible
 ?6? Hopeless  (I can't remember if Marc added this one or not)

...darn that lonely d3. It's just *so*...jarring, inelegant <sigh>

Combat-wise, I would have liked the stats to be more GURPS like, as
in 2d+2, and on the same scale from personal to ship, but it did
work and it wasn't overly complicated.


Eris
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
"Eris Reddoch" <eris@pcola.gulf.net>    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1999 23:21:04 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@accesstoledo.com>
Subject: Re: <no comment> 

> On Wednesday, 11 August 1999 01:56, Black ICE [SMTP:wombat@premier.net]
> wrote:
> > Keven, while I agree with you that this is a _highly_ implausible means
> > of Virus propagation (even in comparison with all the canonical
> > highly-implausible means of propagation), I must salute a referee who
> > could sell this method to the group's players.
> 
> There was a scene in one of the TSR Buck Rogers books where an 'computer
> personality'  (someone who had his personality digitized and ran as a
> program) decided to make a more permanent backup of himself.
> 
> He used a laser drill to carve a binary representation of his code into a
> slab of bedrock.  The idea was that if in the future someone scanned the
> carvings into a computer, his program would be brought 'back to life'. 

Now *THAT'S* hardcore.

Keven

- -- 
tc++ tm+ tn t4- to ru++ ge+ 3i c+ jt au st- ls pi+ ta+ he+ so- vi zh sy
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

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

Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1999 23:27:24 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@accesstoledo.com>
Subject: Re: <no comment> 

> On Wednesday, 11 August 1999 01:56, Black ICE [SMTP:wombat@premier.net]
> wrote:
> > Keven, while I agree with you that this is a _highly_ implausible means
> > of Virus propagation (even in comparison with all the canonical
> > highly-implausible means of propagation), I must salute a referee who
> > could sell this method to the group's players.
> 
> There was a scene in one of the TSR Buck Rogers books where an 'computer
> personality'  (someone who had his personality digitized and ran as a
> program) decided to make a more permanent backup of himself.
> 
> He used a laser drill to carve a binary representation of his code into a
> slab of bedrock.  The idea was that if in the future someone scanned the
> carvings into a computer, his program would be brought 'back to life'. 

Now *THAT'S* hardcore.

Keven
- -- 
tc++ tm+ tn t4- to ru++ ge+ 3i c+ jt au st- ls pi+ ta+ he+ so- vi zh sy
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

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

Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1999 20:53:35 -0700
From: "Benyamene' ZeAbe' Akella" <xrp@sierratel.com>
Subject: Re: What's the News on T5?

I don't really like the idea of an "impossible" difficulty level, seems a 
tad oxymoronic. IMTU:

2   Easy
3   Average
4 Difficult
5   Formidable
6   Staggering

And as to scaling the importance of atts vs training, how about:

Arcane Skill=Rank+Att/5
Technical Skill=Rank+Att/4
Common Skill=Rank+Att/3
Primal Skill=Rank+Att/2

With Arcane Skills being things like Gravitics, J-Drive Engineering, etc.,
Technical Skills being Medicine, Melee Cbt., etc., Common (I don't like the
name, but this is just OTTOMH) including Starship Piloting, Administration,
etc., and finally the Primal Skills being Climbing, Brawling, etc.

But I am thinking maybe Storyteller style resolution, with some types of
tasks listing variations to die rolling procedure. Have I Jumped into
Heretic Space yet? But I am still rolling this around in my head, ideas?
BZA
////////////////////////////////////////
Akella 0609 C654474-6 S kk+ hi++ as+ va+ dr+ da+ so@ zh- vi+  A523
IMTU tc++ ?t4 ru@ 3i+(-) c+ jt au@ st- ls+ pi+ ta@ he+

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

Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1999 23:18:29 -0500 (CDT)
From: trentfs@ix.netcom.com
Subject: Re: What's the News on T5?

SD Mooney wrote:

> Well, the T4.1 / T5 playtest draft I have seems to be very much a fixed 
and
> updated T4.

Alas.  As I implied before, this makes me none too happy.

> I disagree with your opinion on T4; I believe the execution was flawed,
> rather than the concept. The manuals were badly playtested, poorly laid 
out
> but it did have the distinction of having one of the fastest and most
> effective combat systems in a Traveller game, plus a skill system that
> works with the T4.1 fixes (which are actually on the T4 refs screen).

Whern I speak of game mechanics I'm talking four things: 1) character 
generation, 2) task resolution, 3) personal combat, 4) vehicle (in this 
case space) combat.
	The T4 character generation system I rather liked, as it made 
characters from various careers more balanced skill-wise than CT/MT.  Plus, 
I know that this is one of the areas Marc has put a lot of effort into, so 
I'm confident it will be good in T5.  
	The T4 task resolution system I hated.  The UTF as per the Ref Screen 
I like (simplified MT), and it is the basis of the format I currently use, 
but the actual mechanics I always hated, and still do.  I think it is too 
heavily weighted in favor of attributes (someone else mentioned the "It's 
Harder Than I Thought" rule which I don't know -- what is it?).  I hate the 
stupid half-die (especially since it shows up on Difficult Tasks -- the 
most frequent ones!).  Last I knew there was no effective system for 
Spectacular Successes and Failures.  If some variation of this system is 
presented in T5 I won't use it -- I'll substitute my house system.  
	The Personal Combat system is quick, but I don't like some of the 
specifics such as Melee Combat not being an Opposed Task, the Range rule 
(counting range bands to make a + DM), the Autofire rule (it's harder to 
hit, but you do more damage -- this doesn't feel right to me at all), etc.  
I also don't like the fact that the rules are never clearly written out in 
a flowsheet format -- I have to dig through the text to find each rule.  I 
much prefer the AHL system, which I think is just as fast, and as of now 
that's what I'll continue to use (slightly updated).
	The Space Combat system in T4 was ridiculous, obviously tacked on at 
the last minute, and I doubt anyone out there actually uses it.  And I 
don't recall there even being a Vehicle Combat system (possibly in CSC?).

Thus IMO the T4 system comes up drastically short in 3 out of 4 major 
areas.  Presumably at least one of these (Space Combat) will be fixed, but 
that still leaves 2 major systems that I dislike enough that, without major 
changes,  I already know I won't use them as written.  What's more, I'll 
replace them essentially with rules from previous editions of the same 
game.  Does it make sense that as the game system grows and evolves that I 
find it worse and less usable?  The goal of T5 should be to bring everyone 
together under one set of rules, and the way to do this is to create rules 
that are really good from the ground up, not to slap quick-fixes over a 
flawed and unpopular rules system, which will just lead to everyone 
continuing to use their own house rules (and spell doom for the game 
commercially, as well).
	We have to assume that T5 will be the last chance for Traveller as a 
rules system, and if it's to stand a chance of success it has to be the 
best possible set of rules -- not only to appeal to fans but to draw new 
interest as well (did Anyone play T4 who wasn't already a fan?).  That 
means intuitive rules that work right out of the box and aren't going to 
require fixes and revisions for years to come, if ever.  I'm not sure if 
this is possible (at least while maintaining a semblance of the original 
game), but I am sure that some tweaked revision of the clunky flaw-ridden 
T4 system isn't going to cut it.

That's the end of my little rant.  I allowed myself to be so strident and 
dramatic because I'm leaving town tomorrow for about a week, and therefore 
won't have to deal with any aftermath of my post.

Later,

Trent

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

Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 00:28:53 -0400
From: "Jory Earl" <j-man@iname.com>
Subject: Re: What's the News on T5?

Say, can anyone post Marc Miller's take on photo-copying or scanning out of
print traveller materials for people who don't have them?
___________________________________________________________
 J-Man
 ICQ# 2843475
 New Hampshire - U.S.A.
 Email : j-man@iname.com
 Home Page : http://www.geocities.com/~jman037/
___________________________________________________________

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

Date: Thu, 12 Aug 99 23:35:58 -0500
From: "Eris Reddoch" <eris@pcola.gulf.net>
Subject: Re: What's the News on T5?

On 08/12/99 at 08:53 PM,  "Benyamene' ZeAbe' Akella" <xrp@sierratel.com> said:

>I don't really like the idea of an "impossible" difficulty level,
>seems a  tad oxymoronic. IMTU:

You aren't the only one to think that, unfortunately those that
write *official* Traveller systems seem to prefer it to all
alternatives. <g> Personally, I call that level Hopeless.  

>2   Easy
>3   Average
>4 Difficult
>5   Formidable
>6   Staggering

I think that's the scale Ken's KBv2 used, with the addition of 7 for
Hopeless/Impossible.  There *is* a problem with using whole d6
steps, you know.  It means you have to get an average of 3.5 more
skill levels to step up one Difficulty level, and that's awfully
steep with the normal skill ranges in any of the systems.

>And as to scaling the importance of atts vs training, how about:

>Arcane Skill=Rank+Att/5
>Technical Skill=Rank+Att/4
>Common Skill=Rank+Att/3
>Primal Skill=Rank+Att/2

>With Arcane Skills being things like Gravitics, J-Drive Engineering,
>etc., Technical Skills being Medicine, Melee Cbt., etc., Common (I
>don't like the name, but this is just OTTOMH) including Starship
>Piloting, Administration, etc., and finally the Primal Skills being
>Climbing, Brawling, etc.

>But I am thinking maybe Storyteller style resolution, with some types
>of tasks listing variations to die rolling procedure. Have I Jumped
>into Heretic Space yet? 

No doubt about it. <g>

Eris
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
"Eris Reddoch" <eris@pcola.gulf.net>    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 01:35:36 EDT
From: GypsyComet@aol.com
Subject: Re: AAFES (was: Re: PRB)

From: Black ICE <wombat@premier.net>


>I have drill this weekend, but I'll be posting the AAFES starship and
>"Running Chef" ship's launch early next week.  My premise for this
>design is that an AAFES starship is designed to provide shoppette and

 All this talk about jump-capable kitchens is giving me visions of the
Third Imperium's version of the Iron Chefs. The special Yacht design
is already taking form in my fevered brain...

GC

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

Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 01:39:46 -0400
From: "DaveShayne" <daveshayne@email.msn.com>
Subject: re: leonard's reply to star question Long

I wrote

>>
>> 1)
>> Stars begin their lives at the hot (ie bluer, ie B stage)
>> or at least toward the blue end of the spectrum.
>> as a given star ages it slowly cools down, moving toward the red, or M
end.

you replied

>Nope. Stars do *not* evolve that way. I don't have any of my textbooks
>handy, so I can only describe things roughly.

Didn't think so. It looked to tidy to be true.
Could you give me author/title information for some good texts on the
subject?

>A star *does* tend to move somewhat on the H-R diagram's "color" axis
>as it moves into the "main sequence". But not that much.

>Starts start out "black" and and as they heat up, they'd move from
>class M on up *towards* Blue. but only the largest ever get there. Most
>never even get out of M.

<snip>

>This position is determined *solely* by mass. The more massive, the
>hotter (and "bluer") the star.

 <snip>

>Somewhat more massive stars will collapse like this, but in the
>process, the core will get hot and dense enough to fuse helium. And
>likely also start some hydrogen fusion in layers above *that*. This
>causes the outer layers of the start to ballon *way* out. So much so
>that the star, regardless of its former class is now "red". A "Red
>giant".

At what threhold mass does this happen?

>Eventually the helium will run out. And we get another collapse in the
>core. If the star is massive enough, this will start fusing some other
>element (oxygen?), and likewise trigger helium fusion and ydrogen
>fusion in "shells" farther out from the core.

>For increasing stellar masses, the scenario repeats, with heavier and
>heavier elements bein fused in the core. Until you get a star that has
>iron as the next available "fuel".

Again, what are the thresholds?

<snip>

>And the core either cools into a white dwarf, or, if massive enough,
>becomes a neutron star. Or maybe even a black hole.

And again, what are the thresholds?

>> The stars initial mass will determine how quickly this occurs, and has a
>> great bearing on weather the end star product is a black hole, nuetron
star,
>> or brown dwarf.

>Actually, the end points are (in order of starting masss of star):

>1. black hole
>2. neutron star
>3. white dwarf
>4. "black" dwarf

>Brown dwarves are bodies that were never massive enough to *start*
>fusion. A "black dwarf" is a white dwarf that has finally radiated away
>all it's remaining thermal energy. Which will take some trillions of
>years.

I actually knew that about brown/black dwarfs
I must have had a central brain malfunction on that one.

I must say this information has been quite helpfull. I'm going to pull out
my copy
of WBH and see if I can put together the time lines. Probly not considering
my incredible naivety on the subject, but it's something to do.

daveshayne@msn.com

+  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +

No poor dumb Bugeyedmonster ever won an interstellar war by
dying for it's species. You win the intersteller war by making
the other poor dumb Bugeyedmonster die for it's.

+  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +

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

Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1999 23:04:30 -0700
From: "Kiri Aradia Morgan" <tiamat@tsoft.com>
Subject: Iron Chef

>>I have drill this weekend, but I'll be posting the AAFES starship and
"Running Chef" ship's launch early next week.
> All this talk about jump-capable kitchens is giving me visions of the
Third Imperium's version of the Iron Chefs. The special Yacht design is
already taking form in my fevered brain...
>
::kirichan howls in amazement and laughter, then gathers herself up slowly
to face the keyboard::

Are you talking about the Japanese TV show _Iron Chef_???

::snicker snicker::

Oh my ghodz...  I can just imagine that guy in his wild outfits on
anagathics...

I can see Iron Chef French, Iron Chef Japanese, et al. being joined by Iron
Chef Vargr, Iron Chef Aslan...

and I am not yet ready for the dreaded...

K'Kree Confront!!!!!!!!

(For the uninitiated, there are Iron Chefs, or champion chefs, of all the
major cuisines, and the challengers who want to become an Iron Chef must
challenge one of them.  There are several judges who judge the food, some
are consistent and others are guest judges.  And in each "confront" every
dish must contain the stated ingredient... even desserts and appetizers...)

kirichan, still howling at the image of Iron Vargr and the challenger doing
K'Kree Confront...

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

Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1999 20:22:21 +0100
From: John Buston <John.Buston@tesco.net>
Subject: Re:First In

>Where does this put the so called hot gas giants apparently being discovered
>in inner orbits? Is there a theory about their formation?

A theory? No.      Lots of Theories? Yes. :)

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

Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 03:05:50 -0400
From: "DaveShayne" <daveshayne@email.msn.com>
Subject: Re: Reprint CT (Was Re: News on T5)

Did somebody say Marc was reprinting the CT Rules.
Joy, Joy.
Mine have suffered from years of use. (Much greater wear than my D&D)
It would be quite nice to get some fresh replacements

Oh I hope I read correctly.

... reprint CT ...

+  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +

daveshayne@msn.com

No poor, dumb Bug-Eyed-Monster ever won an intergallactic war by dying for
it's species. You win the Intergalactic war by making the other poor, dumb
Bug-Eyed-Monster die for It's.
+  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +

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

End of Traveller-digest V1999 #953
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe
"local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
