Traveller-digest    Saturday, September 4 1999    Volume 1999 : Number 1056



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: AKUS MOBY Update... 
Re: Safety of low berths...
Re: inter species relationships
Re: Safety of low berths...
The Big Button (was Re: Testing the Waters)
Re: Re TAS
Re: Safety of low berths...
Imperial military and PR (was: Safety of low berths...)
Re: Safety of low berths
Re: Foundation of the Traveller News Service
Re: Imperial military and PR (was: Safety of low berths...)
Re: Nuclear War
Re: The Big Button (was Re: Testing the Waters)
Beauty
Re: AKUS MOBY Update...
Re: fun with nuclear weapons!
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #1048
RE: standards of beauty
Re: Re Canon & JG
Judges Guild stuff Fw: Aaron's UPDATE - 9/4/99
Re: Judges Guild stuff Fw: Aaron's UPDATE - 9/4/99

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

Date: Sat, 04 Sep 1999 04:39:01 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@accesstoledo.com>
Subject: Re: AKUS MOBY Update... 

> As for my yarn, I kept it as neutral as I could.  I suspect the
> story told from the viewpoints of Ricardo, Arvitis, Woof, Shawn,
> Jaren, Cory, Kelly, Martan or Mira would all be different and
> equally interesting.

And, in Jaren's case, in particular, in broken Russian with caustic comments 
about some of the people he's had to deal with.  <grin>

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: Sat, 4 Sep 1999 19:42:09 +1000
From: "The Roc" <roc@kewl.com.au>
Subject: Re: Safety of low berths...

- ----- Original Message -----
From: Andy Coombes <coombes@bcs.org.uk>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com>
Sent: Saturday, September 04, 1999 12:20 AM
Subject: Safety of low berths



>
> Now, I'm no military historian, but I suspect a military force which took
> losses at 17% or 8% would be considered to have taken "heavy damage". If
> that's the case, it's hard to imagine how a naval commander could make the
> case for a frozen watch. It's also hard imagine anyone choosing to travel
> low passage, except _possibly_ refugees, for whom the alternative is
> certain death. I don't believe that there are enough refugees to make a
> reasonable economic argument for putting low berths on most passenger
ships.
>

I believe allied bombing raids over Germany during WWII had higher
acceptable losses (especially the US daylight missions)?  I'm also lead to
understand that all of the beach landings undertook during WWII had
acceptable losses marked higher than 20%, and again, considering all the
pacific landings the US made, this is an horrendous figure.

Mind you, this is from memory and I may be off a "%" or three, but I'm not
normally to far off.  Maybe someone on the list may have access to actual
figures?

I also heard that US forces in Vietnam had a high ratio of acceptable
losses?  Although this to me is just hearsay and not read personally by
myself.  But I believe that in peacetime, there isn't much call for
"acceptable losses?"

- -- The Roc

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

Date: Sat, 4 Sep 1999 20:09:25 +1000
From: "The Roc" <roc@kewl.com.au>
Subject: Re: inter species relationships

- ----- Original Message ----- 
From: Ian Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca>
To: <traveller@mpgn.com>
Sent: Saturday, September 04, 1999 12:41 AM
Subject: RE: inter species relationships



> 
> Given the Imperiums penchant for manipulating public opinion
> (c.f. attitudes towards psionics), it would not surprise me
> if Vargr were generally looked down on, and mixed marriages
> regarded with distaste.  In any event, I would expect that
> such marriages would be rare, but who knows...
> 
> Peez
> 

That I find a very valid point actually

- -- The Roc

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

Date: Sat, 4 Sep 1999 22:33:07 +1200
From: "Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz>
Subject: Re: Safety of low berths...

On 4 Sep 99, at 19:42, The Roc wrote:

> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Andy Coombes <coombes@bcs.org.uk>
> To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com>
> Sent: Saturday, September 04, 1999 12:20 AM
> Subject: Safety of low berths
> 
> 
> 
> >
> > Now, I'm no military historian, but I suspect a military force which
> > took losses at 17% or 8% would be considered to have taken "heavy
> > damage". If that's the case, it's hard to imagine how a naval commander
> > could make the case for a frozen watch. It's also hard imagine anyone
> > choosing to travel low passage, except _possibly_ refugees, for whom the
> > alternative is certain death. I don't believe that there are enough
> > refugees to make a reasonable economic argument for putting low berths
> > on most passenger
> ships.
> >
> 
> I believe allied bombing raids over Germany during WWII had higher
> acceptable losses (especially the US daylight missions)?  I'm also lead to
> understand that all of the beach landings undertook during WWII had
> acceptable losses marked higher than 20%, and again, considering all the
> pacific landings the US made, this is an horrendous figure.
> 
> Mind you, this is from memory and I may be off a "%" or three, but I'm not
> normally to far off.  Maybe someone on the list may have access to actual
> figures?
> 
> I also heard that US forces in Vietnam had a high ratio of acceptable
> losses?  Although this to me is just hearsay and not read personally by
> myself.  But I believe that in peacetime, there isn't much call for
> "acceptable losses?"

Well, IIRC it's generally accepted that a unit that takes over 33% 
losses is pretty much had it until the losses can be made good 
and the unit given some R&R, re-training, etc. Of course there are 
a number of famous exceptions to the rule.


- --
Rupert Boleyn <paradise.net.nz>
Wellington, New Zealand

A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history.

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

Date: Sat, 04 Sep 1999 07:38:14 -0300
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca>
Subject: The Big Button (was Re: Testing the Waters)

At 01:09 AM 04/09/1999 -0500, you wrote:
>As long as this entire list seems to be tending towards the verboten, might
>as well toss my bit in.
><snip>

        Boldly into the breach, eh?  =)

>Okay, so I think that some of this has to do with the perspective I come
>from, namely that I only *cowering in shame in a darkened corner* started
>playing Traveller with TNE (and after GDW went belly up, to boot), 

        You're forgiven =)

>so I
>never saw it as the aforementioned "cosmic reset switch" that everybody in
>their right mind did, but rather as one of the most creative and frigtening
>enemies that has been brought forward in a long time.  Just an issue of POV,
>I suppose.

        My biggest problem with TNE isn't Virus.  Its that I don't use the
3i, and therefore the whole product was Just Another Different Rules Set For
Traveller.  I'm currently playing in a TNE-set PBEM (Hi, Derek!) and rather
enjoying it.  My only on-going concern is that I see no way to win...  Virus
is like Anthrax;  once an area is contaminated, there seems to be no way to
sterlize it...  even a hand-calculator could be the Agent of Doom if you
aren't careful while scavenging.  <shrug>  You can quarentine and take
precautions, but its there forever.

>And as an odd side note, after a hiatus in our session when I brought
>forward the proposal of playing GT to my group the outcry was amazing.  They
>thought that playing without an empire to rebulid, an implacable foe to
>conquor, and the intense moral complexities of just what the RC was doing
>would be (quote) "boring as hell."
>Oh well, still trying to convince them otherwise.
>-J.S.

        Its funny, actually.  My players don't like gaming in the 3i for the
same reason.  It is so well developed and so well organized, there is
nowhere for them to make an impact...  Between the 3i Navy and the MiB
(grin) hanging over every world like a Sword of Damocles nothing is every
going to get big enough to be an epic. (For all you 3i junkies out there,
please don't bother writing me volumes as to why I am wrong.  Thanks.)
        That's the reason we've never run a 3i-based game.  <shrug>  First
game was a one-sector empire wedged between three other 1 - 2 sector
empires;  very "Pirates of the Caribean" feel to it.  Current game is low
tech with less than a sector and the Galaxy wide open for the taking;
players are investing the money they've made into an exploration ship to
head out into the unknown in search of some place they are already calling
"New Eden"...  
        Anyhoo, my point (and I do have one ;-) is that not everyone has a
problem with TNE because of Virus.  And someone else agrees with you that
the 3i is boring.  =)

        --Michel

	-+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-
	Michel R. Vaillancourt	misha@atlantic-online.ns.ca
				ICQ # 31172292
	"Reality Error in Progress....
			....Do Not Adjust Your Penguin"	
	-+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-
	Into Cyberpunk?  Check Out:
		"http://www.atlantic-online.ns.ca/cp2020"
	Into Traveller?  Check Out:
		"http://www.atlantic-online.ns.ca/traveller"
	-+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-
	***REMEMBER - Always virus-check your emails ***
	-+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-

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

Date: Sun, 5 Sep 1999 00:26:06 +1000
From: "The Roc" <roc@kewl.com.au>
Subject: Re: Re TAS

- ----- Original Message -----
From: B. Mallory <bmallory@earthlink.net>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com>
Sent: Saturday, September 04, 1999 12:58 PM
Subject: Re: Re TAS


>
>
> "William F. Hostman" wrote:
> >
> > >Dates may be wrong, as this is done from memory.
> > >
> snip
>
> Hello to all.  This is my first post for this group so I will keep it
> brief.
> Adventure 3 Twilight's Peak page 46, a little below the middle of the
> page
> mentions the following:
>
> Octagon Society established in 342.
> It was the first major distressed spacefarer assistance operation for
> Spinward Marches.
> Thrived in public contributions and some tax revenues for 150 years.
> It collapsed in the late 400's over scandals re shelter quality and
> disposition of funds.
> Society disolved in 499 and assets sold at auction.
>
> I hope that this helps.
> bmallory@earthlink.net
>

Ah, thank-you.  My memory wasn't far wrong, however, that phrase "It was the
first major distressed spacefarer assistance operation for Spinward Marches"
does not preclude the TAS from starting somewhere else, well before the
Marches were colonised and/or annexed/etc.  But thank-you for that on my
behalf, it does still answer "a question" for me.

- -- The Roc

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

Date: Sat, 04 Sep 1999 07:33:07
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Safety of low berths...

At 07:42 PM 9/4/1999 +1000, you wrote:

>I believe allied bombing raids over Germany during WWII had higher
>acceptable losses (especially the US daylight missions)?  I'm also lead to
>understand that all of the beach landings undertook during WWII had
>acceptable losses marked higher than 20%, and again, considering all the
>pacific landings the US made, this is an horrendous figure.

It depends on the nation.  The Soviet army had plans to keep units on the
line well past the 40% casualty level, whereas the US threshold was much
lower.  It also depends on the mission.  If you are storming a hostile,
fortified beach, you are going to have to accept that some units will be
wiped out to the last man; something you would accept on a movement to
contact situation.

>I also heard that US forces in Vietnam had a high ratio of acceptable
>losses?  Although this to me is just hearsay and not read personally by
>myself.  But I believe that in peacetime, there isn't much call for
>"acceptable losses?"

The Soviets allowed for the occasional training death as part of the
mission.  When I was at Ft. Benning in 1985, we had a kid run in front of a
firing M-60.  That shut down or training for a week while everybody from
the Battalion commander to the Criminal Investigation Division investigated
what had happened. (He zigged when he should have zagged.)

It's a sad commentary that our leaders now have to plan on the public
relations aspect of any military campaign.  With everyone pussy-footing
around trying to avoid any casualties, since the Five-sided Funny Farm
knows that the grieving families will be on the six-o'clock news, readiness
and skill have to suffer.
- -- 

Doug Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com
Web pages temporarily unavalible

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

Date: Sun, 5 Sep 1999 02:54:39 +1200
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Imperial military and PR (was: Safety of low berths...)

Date sent:      	Sat, 04 Sep 1999 07:33:07
From:           	"Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@mindspring.com>

> At 07:42 PM 9/4/1999 +1000, you wrote:

> It's a sad commentary that our leaders now have to plan on the public
> relations aspect of any military campaign.  With everyone pussy-footing
> around trying to avoid any casualties, since the Five-sided Funny Farm
> knows that the grieving families will be on the six-o'clock news, readiness
> and skill have to suffer.

OTOH, it does mean that gross blunders such as Bradley's at Omaha
Beach are less likely.

ObTrav: Just how much did Norris have to worry about this during the
FFW? Just what was the effect on public opinion of the Battle of Terra
in the Solomani Rim War? Given that any assault on a defended high
population world is going to be a meat grinder like nothing else, just
how does the Imperium deal with the PR issues?


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

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

Date: Sat, 4 Sep 1999 17:01:12 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Safety of low berths

Andy Coombes writes about the safety of low berths. Actually the horrendous
odds only applied in the CT rules (and maybe T4, I can't remember). In MT,
TNE, and GT low berth is perfectly survivable as long as you have a
qualified physician attending the revival. I cannot, as I said, recall
if T4 went back to the old rules. somehow I think not, but I could be
misremembering.

>So, my questions to the list are:
>1) Is the risk of travelling low passage too high?

In CT, yes.

>2) If so, what is a more acceptable risk?

1 in a 1000 maybe?


      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, 4 Sep 1999 17:11:27 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Foundation of the Traveller News Service

"The Roc" <roc@kewl.com.au> writes:


>I could be wrong (I still don't have my books back), but wasn't the
>Traveller's Aid Society based on the defunked, Octagon Society?

There was no connection between the two. There's an obscure, and propably
non-canonical article in an issue of _Different Worlds_ where the founding
date for the TAS is given, but it's a long time since I saw it and I can't
remember when it was. I do remember that it was some time after Year 0.
However, T4 mentions the TAS as existing in Milieu Zero (mostly because
it reprinted old CT texts verbatim). (I was not impressed with the editing
of T4. 'Exit Visa', one of the sample adventures, was taken from a CT book
and was actually set on Alell, a planet that hadn't been settled yet...) 


      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: Sat, 04 Sep 1999 08:38:50
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Imperial military and PR (was: Safety of low berths...)

At 02:54 AM 9/5/1999 +1200, you wrote:

>OTOH, it does mean that gross blunders such as Bradley's at Omaha
>Beach are less likely.

Blunder?

>ObTrav: Just how much did Norris have to worry about this during the
>FFW? Just what was the effect on public opinion of the Battle of Terra
>in the Solomani Rim War? Given that any assault on a defended high
>population world is going to be a meat grinder like nothing else, just
>how does the Imperium deal with the PR issues?

Considering the distances involved, most people won't even care that the
Rim war happened.  I sincerely doubt that more than one in ten could tell
you what Sector Earth is in.  It's just not relevant.

For example, my late father was from Stafford, in Devon.  I have no idea of
where that is in England.  None.  It was never important to me.  Change
that scale from one generation on one planet to hundreds of light-years
across millennia, and most people won't care.

Also, the Imperium controls the news feeds through the X-boat system.  They
can massage and spin the news to their liking, and give the "official
story" time to grow before independent witnesses make it home.  Another
example, we are 130 years "away" from the US Civil War.  The story we were
all feed as children was that it was about slavery.  The truth was far more
complex, but the "distance" and relevance to our daily lives made that
simple story acceptable.

Why should the Imperium report casualties?  Unless there's a specific
propaganda purpose (remember the Arizona!), tell the mob that the enemy is
being whipped.  Deaths are reported to the families, as single tragic
incidents.  You don't tell them that their son/daughter/spore was killed
along with 6000 of his buddies when a Solomani tac nuke went off over the
field hospital he was in.
- -- 

Doug Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com
Web pages temporarily unavalible

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

Date: Sat, 4 Sep 1999 10:48:09 -0500
From: "Thomas Vickers" <redroach@flex.net>
Subject: Re: Nuclear War

>>>>> > Is that the tactical nuke game that said "To simulate a strategic
>>>>> > nuclear war, soak the map in lighter fluid and apply match.


That was the line from the rules for the war game "Nato". It was based
around a conventional war in Europe during the 80's.  The one drawback to
the whole game was that the designers refused to believe that battlefield
nukes would do anything other than start a world wide exchange (probably
true) and it was frustrating to be the nato commander and get hammered by
the warsaw pact repeatedly.  If you went for your nukes, the game was pretty
much over.

tv
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
- ------------
"The dumber you seem to be, the more surprised they'll be when you kill
them."

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

Date: Sat, 4 Sep 1999 11:08:05 -0500
From: "Thomas Vickers" <redroach@flex.net>
Subject: Re: The Big Button (was Re: Testing the Waters)

"...
        Anyhow, my point (and I do have one ;-) is that not everyone has a
problem with TNE because of Virus.  And someone else agrees with you that
the 3i is boring.  =)

        Have to put my voice in here. I loved the 3I for a long time, but my
players hated it. In fact it pretty much was the main factor in the demise
of CT in our gaming group hundreds of years ago.  I finally picked up TNE a
couple of months ago and strangely enough my group ( a lot older and with
much less hair) tends to like the background.
I am still not convinced that the Virus is the greatest thing, but I do
understand what it is supposed to do.

I still think that a campaign at the end of the long night would be  a good
one. It would provide an up and coming 3I and provide for plenty of
exploration, rediscovery of lost worlds etc and still be traveller.

TV
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
- ------------
"The dumber you seem to be, the more surprised they'll be when you kill
them."

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

Date: Sat, 4 Sep 1999 13:03:57 -0400 (EDT)
From: Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca>
Subject: Beauty

Just to dump some gas on this little emerging flame war:  There are some
studies showing a positive correlation between attractiveness and such
nasty qualities as egotism and superficiality.  Of course, being the
incredibly handsome and sartorially skilled individual that I am, I'm only
insulting myself here... :-).

Oh, and just to offend the "biology is not destiny" crowd, there are a few
beauty standards that are likely to remain constant among humans.  For
instance, across history and culture women have always preferred tall men
with high social status.  Likewise a waist-to-hip ratio of .7 in women has
been preferred by men across culture and time.  Some studies also suggest
that symmetry is an important and fairly universal factor in
attractiveness in humans.  These are of course generalizations across
large populations, and of course there are women who like short men and
men who like non-curvy women. 

Charles C. (a short, lop-sided, low-status male :-)

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

Date: Sat, 4 Sep 1999 13:21:24 -0500
From: "Kurtis Rodgers" <kurtis@fastlane.net>
Subject: Re: AKUS MOBY Update...

(Damn!  That's the second time in the last month I've scewed up the subject
line.  Double-Doh!)

> Date: Fri, 03 Sep 99 20:14:38 -0500
> From: "Eris Reddoch" <eris@pcola.gulf.net>
> Subject: Re: AKUS MOBY Update...
<snip...>
> >The whole 'ship as an inheritance' plot element strongly reminded me
> >of (the late, lamented) Brian Daley's Hobart Floyt & Alacrity
> >Fitzhugh novels. Hadn't thought of those books in quite a while...,
> >lots of good material for idea mining there.  Hmm...  :P
>
> No, I haven't read those books.  More material to find and read!  <g>
<...snip>

IMO, they're Brain Daley's best novels:
_Requiem for a Ruler of Worlds_
_Jinx on a Terran Inheritance_
_Fall of the White Ship Avatar_

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0345314875/qid=936468269/sr=1-24/002-
4741743-2349604

Highly recommended!

Kurtis

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

Date: Sat, 4 Sep 1999 13:43:35 -0500
From: "John Majer" <jsmage@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: fun with nuclear weapons!

> ObTrav:  While the 3I has pretty well prevented the use of Weapons of
> Mass Destruction against civilian targets in interstellar conflicts (at
> least within the 3I), what about WMD use between nation-states on
> balkanized worlds?
A) I would stick with nukes, other WMDs don't have the same resonance to
draw from.  Or rather, to use other WMDs takes a whole other set of
considerations.
1) Obivous plot thread - Players arrive at world to find it in the gripps of
a plagirized Cuban Missle Crisis.  Their objective on planet is put deeply
at risk, allong with the populations of whatever country.  Do they do
something about it?  If they don't it makes for a good envionmental piece,
as well as the whole "outrun the shockwave" stuff.
2) Plot thread w/screws - Players are hired to ship/smuggle something to
somewhere, and as they leave eveything goes boom.  Ooops, we just became war
crimials.
3) Bizzaro plot thread - What happens to a planet /after/ a massive nuclear
war, or one that has gone on for some time (I mean, other than it getting
Red Zoned).  The players have to interact with a cuture where tossing ICBMs
is par for the course.  Break out Genisis of the Daleks, 50s propoganda, and
good ol' West End's Paranoia, and have at it.
- -J.S.

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

Date: Sat, 4 Sep 1999 15:06:14 EDT
From: Sethkimmel@aol.com
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #1048

In a message dated 9/4/99 12:11:16 AM !!!First Boot!!!, 
ajackson@molly.iii.com writes:

<< Bog.  Nuclear war doesn't have a map, and isn't tactical.  I know I saw 
that line about lighter fluid, but I think it was another game (ogre?  Dunno).
  >>

but you have to love a game that they tried to ban in the UK as a "violent 
antisocia(?)" game... :-). It is one of two card games that I will play (SJG 
Illuminati is the other...)

Also I vaguely remember that "lighter fluid" quote from one of the SPI Soviet 
invasion of Western Europe games printed in the 70's (Nato Division 
Commander, Mech War, Red Star/White Star?...). These games are just before my 
time (I started in 1981 with Ogre/GEV and of course Traveller...), but I 
vaguely remember one of those games using that quote to simulate the 
escalation of convention war into nuclear war....

Seth

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

Date: Sat, 04 Sep 1999 12:15:39 -0700
From: "Kelly St.Clair" <kellys@efn.org>
Subject: RE: standards of beauty

>Hm, what are standards of beauty in the 3rd imperium?  I mean, our current
>standard of beauty is nothing like what it was 400 years ago (when I'd
>have been considered one of the world's hottest babes, more's the pity...)

I suspect, based on our own history, that the main factor in the society's
standard of beauty is going to be whatever phenotype is most expensive to
achieve.  The rich are *always* beautiful.  (Thus we have the current
reversal of the situation in the Middle Ages, where being round and pasty
meant you didn't have to work and could eat as much as you wanted, unlike
those grubby peasants with their muscles and tans from working in the
fields all day...)

The next biggest influence, in any society with media as prevalent as it is
today (or even in the last few centuries), will be what the Fashion
Industry(tm) declares, based on what appears to outsiders to be little more
than whim, what is Hot now.  This applies to looks as well as clothing and
accessories.

Beyond these blanket generalizations, my muse fails me.  Anyone else?



- --------------
Kelly St.Clair   "At last we will reveal our pants to the Jedi.  At last we
kellys@efn.org    will have revenge."

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

Date: Sat, 4 Sep 1999 08:20:10 -0500 (CDT)
From: Cynthia Higginbotham <cyhiggin@pipeline.com>
Subject: Re: Re Canon & JG

> OTOH, I *Love* the 4 sector block JG did (Ley, Maranatha Alkahest,
> Glimmerdrift Reaches, and Cruicis Margin)... they were more informative
> than the GDW CT sector books (Rolomani RIm and Spinward Marches)...

I have Ley and Glimmerdrift (or was it Crucis Margin?) and I 
have to agree with you--they wrote the sector books with an eye
toward making them interesting and useful for GMs and adventures.
The GDW sector books tended to be dry lists of stats.

OTOH, the Paranoia Press products (Beyond & Vanguard) tended to
pack a little too much "interesting" into one subsector...

> OTGH,  GDW "Decanonized" them (specifically the JG sectors) in _Atlas of
> the Imperium_
> At least the SM and SR sectors have had a lot of follow on developments...

IIRC, it was during the MT era that GDW specifically said that
the JG products were "not canon".  Why, I don't know. Most of them
were better and more imaginative than the corresponding DGP stuff from
the same area.

And did anyone ever figure out where the Dynchia went?  In the
MT-era write-up of Hinterworlds, they didn't leave a spot for their
"12-world" (or whatever it was) empire.

				--Cynthia

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

Date: Sat, 4 Sep 1999 15:52:25 -0400
From: "Thomas Schoene" <TomSchoene@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Judges Guild stuff Fw: Aaron's UPDATE - 9/4/99

This might be of interest to the folks discussing Judges Guild sectors for
Traveller.

- ----------
> From: ALeeder454@aol.com
> To: undisclosed-recipients:;
> Subject: Aaron's UPDATE - 9/4/99
> Date: Saturday, 04 September, 1999 3:27 AM
[snip]
> 
> JUDGES GUILD
> 
> These limited edition packs were generally limited to between 1000-3000 
> copies each.  They are almost impossible to find intact, with the
"limited 
> edition" sheet and shrinkwrap.  First I've ever seen.
> 
> Science Fiction Campaign Pack includes Ley Sector, Tancred, Glimmerdrift 
> Reaches, and Corsairs of the Turku Waste SW/Nm. $40.00 
> Science Fiction Campaign Game Aide Pack includes Referee Screen, 50 Star 
> Bases, Traveller Log Book, Starships & Spacecraft, and Navigator's
Starcharts 
> SW/Nm. $45.00 
> Science Fiction Campaign Booster Pack includes Marantha-Alkahest, Simba 
> Safari, Doom of the Singing Star, and Crucis Margin SW/Nm. $40.00 
> Science Fiction Adventure Campaign Pack includes Amycus Probe, Rogue Moon
> of Spinstorme, Ghostring and Waspwinter SW/Nm. $40.00 

[snip]

> THOUSANDS of new and out of print games at:
> 
> Aaron's Out of Print Games
> http://members.aol.com/aleeder454

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

Date: Sat, 4 Sep 1999 16:30:03 -0400
From: "Sword Worlder" <swordworlder@clinic.net>
Subject: Re: Judges Guild stuff Fw: Aaron's UPDATE - 9/4/99

There is a fellow who purchased a huge pile of this stuff who has offered
these to The Traveller Trader.  Based on my prior experiences with JG stuff
I have not bought from him, but his prices are:

Sci-Fi Adventure Campaign Pack  tr4 $20.00
Sci-Fi Campaign Booster Pack    tr1 $15.00
Sci-Fi Campaign Game Aide Pack  tr2 $25.00
Sci-Fi Campaign Pack    tr3 $20.00

If you have any interest in ordering some I'd be glad to give you contact
info.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The TRAVELLER Domain
http://www.downport.com
Colin Michael, WebDev

- ----- Original Message -----
From: Thomas Schoene <TomSchoene@worldnet.att.net>
> > Science Fiction Campaign Pack includes Ley Sector, Tancred, Glimmerdrift
> > Reaches, and Corsairs of the Turku Waste SW/Nm. $40.00
> > Science Fiction Campaign Game Aide Pack includes Referee Screen, 50 Star
> > Bases, Traveller Log Book, Starships & Spacecraft, and Navigator's
> Starcharts
> > SW/Nm. $45.00
> > Science Fiction Campaign Booster Pack includes Marantha-Alkahest, Simba
> > Safari, Doom of the Singing Star, and Crucis Margin SW/Nm. $40.00
> > Science Fiction Adventure Campaign Pack includes Amycus Probe, Rogue
Moon
> > of Spinstorme, Ghostring and Waspwinter SW/Nm. $40.00

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

End of Traveller-digest V1999 #1056
***********************************

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
