Traveller-digest     Saturday, October 2 1999     Volume 1999 : Number 1153



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Shionthy
Re: Signing the TML database
Re: 2300 AD
Re: UNCLASSIFIED Traveller's many faces (& typos)...
Re: Re TNE/Nth RFW
Re: RPG history and development
Re: Re TNE/Nth RFW
Re: Military Bands (was Re: Bagpipes)
Re: Re TNE/Nth RFW
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #1143
Re: Optional Rules (was: GURPS Rules)
Re: Optional Rules (was: GURPS Rules)
Re: Re TNE/Nth RFW
Re: Re TNE/Nth RFW
Re: Optional Rules (was: GURPS Rules)
Re: Optional Rules (was: GURPS Rules)
"Unofficial" Campaigns
Re: Citizens of the TML (was: Traveller Player Roster)
Re: Re TNE/Nth RFW
Re: Suliikarin Chrysalis escape pod
Re: Traveller Versions

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

Date: Sat, 2 Oct 1999 15:50:09 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Shionthy

Douglas E. Berry writes:

>>I guess we need to know Shionthy's star  type  (haven't  got  the
>>books with me), and distence of  the  planetoid  belt.  Was  this
>>system ever defined in expanded form?

But since Marc Miller has stated on the TML that Shionthy was the location
of Eskaloyt, that has to be a mistake. I don't have my copy of _Droyne_
here, but IIRC it states what range Eskaloyt's sun must have fallen into.
Shionthy's sun must fall into that range. I'll check when I get home.


Peter Trevor writes:

>The secondary issue ... a reality  check  ...  would  be:  is  it
>plausable for antimatter objects to survive in  a  normal  matter
>planetoid belt for that length of  time?  Failure  of  this  test
>would suggest that:
>(a) whatever created the  antimatter  is  more  recent  than  the
>     Ancient War, or ...

Somebody else posted this a few days ago, but I guess you must have missed
it: According to _Secret of the Ancients_, p. 23, that Shionthy was
converted to an asteroid belt during the Final War.

(This does present a small problem, since Marc Miller in a post on the TML
stated that Eskaloyt used to be in the Shionthy system, but was pincehed
off into a pocket universe and still survives in that. My own explanation
for this is that Grandfather had a decoy Escaloyt ready and switched the
two when whichever Kid it was laubched his attack on the planet.)

 

      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, 2 Oct 1999 09:54:14 -0400
From: "Sword Worlder" <swordworlder@clinic.net>
Subject: Re: Signing the TML database

Huh?  Did you get to the "Citizens of the TML" page?  You sent an e-mail to
webmaster@downport.com and it was returned?  I'd like to see a copy of any
returned e-mails that anyone has gotten, please.  I do not know of any spam
filters on any Downport.com addresses.  I certainly need to get to the
bottom of the problem.  Thank you for informing me.  Anyone else have the
same problem?

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

- ----- Original Message -----
From: Jory Earl <j-man@iname.com>
> Man talk about rude!  I went to the website that SwordWorlder mentioned to
> add my bio and it returned it all saying it was "unwanted spam".
>
> Well I guess I won't be on that list.

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

Date: Sat, 2 Oct 1999 16:03:09 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: 2300 AD

William F. Hostman writes:

>According to the original solicitations to my FLGS [...], [2300 AD] was
>originally supposed to be set in the Traveller Universe.... in 2300 AD (vs
>5600AD for then ruling CT...). 

Are you sure your FLGS owner didn't misunderstand the original information?
_Traveller 2300_ quite obviously didn't belong to the Traveller timeline,
and I believe GDW got a lot of (well-deserved) flack from people who had
quite naturally assumed from the name that it would. As I understand it,
that was the reason for the name change. 


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "Never attribute to malice what can be
	adequately explained by stupidity."
			- Me (but I propably got it from
			  somewhere that I can't recall).

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

Date: Sat, 2 Oct 1999 10:38:34 -0000
From: "Chris Seamans" <semo@pil.net>
Subject: Re: UNCLASSIFIED Traveller's many faces (& typos)...

- -----Original Message-----
From: Sethkimmel@aol.com <Sethkimmel@aol.com>
To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com>
Date: Friday, October 01, 1999 11:36 PM
Subject: Re: UNCLASSIFIED Traveller's many faces (& typos)...


>my pet criticism is that these two companies ultimately failed BECAUSE of 
>these two extremes. You need creative types AND beancounters who can 
>cooperate with each other...


Amen to that.

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

Date: Sat, 02 Oct 1999 07:45:20
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Re TNE/Nth RFW

At 12:45 AM 10/2/1999 +0100, you wrote:

>5) HePLAR and the death of T-plates. I've said it before.

Oddly enough, this was one of the few things i liked.

With t-plates, ships are just magic caprpets that occassionly get boarded.
With HePLAR, it started to feel like space travel.  You needed to pay
attention your fuel state.  It also made p****y more likely, since a pirate
could lurk near the gas giant and wait for prey that were on nearly empty
tanks to glide in...

- -- 

Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html

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

Date: Sat, 02 Oct 1999 07:47:05
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: RPG history and development

At 03:34 AM 10/2/1999 -0500, you wrote:

>Your point of order is well made, sir; all those who have ever played
>any D&D/AD&D characters who belonged to classes other than Fighters,
>Magic-Users, or Clerics will report to the grog bowl.... ;-)

Does that include my half-elf, half-dwarf 18th level anti-paladin/assassin?
- -- 

Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html

"Pardon me, excuse me, Giant vampiric flightless winged
squirrel, coming through.."  -Tim the Paladin, "Yamara"

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

Date: Sat, 2 Oct 1999 11:27:56 -0000
From: "Chris Seamans" <semo@pil.net>
Subject: Re: Re TNE/Nth RFW

- -----Original Message-----
From: William F. Hostman <aramis@gci.net>
To: traveller@mpgn.com <traveller@mpgn.com>
Date: Friday, October 01, 1999 6:02 PM
Subject: Re TNE/Nth RFW


>>I still can't understand why maintaining the nobility in the post-Third
>>Imperium TNE universe seems so important to some people.
>
>It is part of the feel of Traveller, especially CT.

There are alot of things that are part of the feel of Traveller. That still
doesn't explain why maintaining the nobility is so important.

>GDW *PROMISED* an area
>where CT/MT's 3rd Imp CONTINUES ON, not where democracy eliminates the
>nobility. GDW Lied.


So something can't continue on but also change?

>Well, upon hearing what their characters would know about virus, every PC
>in my game took a shoot-first approach to even "Barking Stuffed Toys".
>The
>ones in the rulebook, BTW, make excellent enemies, but not great tools for
>PC's, and are just powerful enough to become fully virused. Add  a lack of
>robot creation rules, and it sure as h*ll looks like the idea of robots as
>useful tools went right out the window.


Oh, okay. You've clarified the position to some extent, going from the idea
TNE removed robots from the setting (David's own words: "- no robots") to
robots weren't in the game the way that DGP envisioned them.

>>That's strange. I thought that Virus actually was the resolution of the
>>Rebellion storyline, at least as the resolution was imagined by GDW.
>
>No, it wasn't a resolution, but a means of wiping the slate clear... and
>there is a difference.

Yes. It was a resolution. The issue of the Rebellion was resolved. However,
instead of trying to redefine the concept of resolution, you simply say it
was a resolution you didn't like, or found implausible.

Personally, I'm not going to go there, and you won't here a peep from me if
you said you don't like the way it was handled. I don't consider myself an
arbiter of taste.

>Hard times was a continuing resolution; it continued
>the thematic elements of the civil war, the madness of lucan, the
>destruction of life, and the hardships and hopes of a resored 3i.


You do realize that with the change of only few words your statement
concerning Hard Times can be applied to TNE from the RC view.

"TNE was a continuing resolution; it continued the thematic elements of the
civil war, the madness of lucan, the destruction of life, and the hardships
and hopes of a restored 3i."

>TNE, and Virus were seen by many (effectively everyone I know FTF who's
>conversant with traveller) as a way of saying "It doesn't matter who should
>have won, who would have won or how, we're just going to do something
>entirely new, and coopt you into buying it because it has the Traveller
>name."


I always thought that Mr. Nilsen's opinion was that nobody would have won;
the strife in the Third Imperium was simply too widespread.

<snippage concerning problems with the rules set, which is really someplace
I'd rather not go>

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

Date: Sat, 02 Oct 1999 09:36:54 -0600
From: cos 90 <cos90@powersurfr.com>
Subject: Re: Military Bands (was Re: Bagpipes)

>You want to try listening to the band of HM Royal Marines playing the
>Imperial March from The Empire Strikes Back - it's a piece you wouldn't
>want to hear them play in anger. 

Just thinking about it is giving me a serious case of the willies... :)

- -- g


     Glenn St-Germain  Edmonton, Alberta, Canada 
cos90@powersurfr.com  http://plaza.powersurfr.com/glenn
        "There is no longer any normal to be"
                                 -- Gary Numan

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

Date: Sat, 2 Oct 1999 11:50:59 -0000
From: "Chris Seamans" <semo@pil.net>
Subject: Re: Re TNE/Nth RFW

- -----Original Message-----
From: Mark Watson <markw@antares.demon.co.uk>
To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com>
Date: Friday, October 01, 1999 9:53 PM
Subject: Re: Re TNE/Nth RFW


>I think when you are responsible for producing the latest revision of
someone
>else's work you have to have some degree of humility about the stuff that
was
>originally there. Dave Nilsen doesn't seem to have had it. One of the big
>things about TNE was that the Traveller nobility oughtn't to exist because
that
>was just plain wrong.

Is that Dave Nilsen speaking, or the people of the former Third Imperium?
That's an important distinction to make. If it's simply the opinion of an
author, and he implausibly thrusts democratization into the setting, I can
agree that it's a bad thing. However, if it can be rectified with other
events in the storyline (such as a civil war between petty nobles that ended
up killing billions, maybe even trillions of sophonts) the opinion of Dave
Nilsen no longer matters as much.

>Presumably if he'd got a hold of Paranoia he'd have got
>rid of that mad old computer as well. It's like having someone come round
to
>your house and watch them go round straightening all your pictures.


I have to disagree, simply because it makes sense in the context of the
storyline that TNE presents to us.

>The virus was the resolution of the rebellion storyline in the same way
that
>the Yucatan impact was the culmination of dinosaur evolution. At a stroke
>something very rich and with considerable further potential was wiped out.


Your mixing your terms here. Resolution and culmination are not synonymous.
"Something very rich and with considerable further potential" is not how I,
personally, would describe the Third Imperium or the Rebellion setting. I do
understand where you're coming from though.

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

Date: Sat, 2 Oct 1999 11:54:02 -0000
From: "Chris Seamans" <semo@pil.net>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #1143

- -----Original Message-----
From: Douglas E. Berry <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com>
To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com>
Date: Friday, October 01, 1999 4:48 PM
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #1143


>One word: "Blackmoor"  (Introduced the Monk and Assassin classes)


Doh!

<wipes the egg from face>

That'll teach me to check the Traveller mailing list when 90% of my brain's
available horsepower is directed toward writing a paper ;)

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

Date: Sat, 02 Oct 1999 08:52:21 -0700
From: "James W. Lindsay" <jlindsay@home.com>
Subject: Re: Optional Rules (was: GURPS Rules)

On Sat, 2 Oct 1999 00:35:50 EDT, GypsyComet@aol.com wrote:

> "Terry Carlino" <carlino@home.com> typed:
> 
> >The best thing about GURPS rules is that everything (practically) is
> >optional. You can fiddle with the rules and use just what you want....
> 
> This is also a problem in potential. As many a Rolemaster, Hero, or SFB 
> player (and a fair number of AD&D players) can attest, there is no such thing 
> as an "optional rule." Every rule in the book, optional or not, stands a good 
> chance of being used if a player benefits from it. GURPS has the same 
> problem. I don't consider this an automatically bad thing, but it takes a 
> certain level of gaming maturity to consciously NOT use rules.

Another problem with a system having so many optional rules is keeping
track of which ones are actually being used.  This can be especially
confusing when two or more campaigns are running simultaneously under two
or more referees-- of which prefer different rule sets.



James W. Lindsay            Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
"http://members.home.net/jlindsay"        ICQ:7521644 (Sharkey)

"Hey, Worf! I hooked Data up to a Modem... wanna see?" -- Riker

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

Date: Sat, 2 Oct 1999 12:00:15 -0400
From: "Thomas Schoene" <TomSchoene@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Optional Rules (was: GURPS Rules)

- ----------
> From: James W. Lindsay <jlindsay@home.com>
> To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com
> Subject: Re: Optional Rules (was: GURPS Rules)
> Date: Saturday, 02 October, 1999 11:52 AM
[snip]
> Another problem with a system having so many optional rules is keeping
> track of which ones are actually being used.  This can be especially
> confusing when two or more campaigns are running simultaneously under two
> or more referees-- of which prefer different rule sets.
> 

More so that playing in two Traveller campaigns, one used modified MT rules
and another using TNE?  I've seen enough evidence of people using optional
and house rules here that I think it's really unfair to single out GT for
loathing on this basis.


Tom Schoene

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

Date: Sat, 02 Oct 1999 12:43:30 -0400
From: Michael Peters <travelleri@home.com>
Subject: Re: Re TNE/Nth RFW

Humm, I've tried to figure how to snip this and can't rightly so I'll
snip all of it and just state that the reason I tacked it on to Dom's
message is because I have much the same feelings regarding TNE. You'll
under stand more when you read below

SD Mooney wrote:
> 
> "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net> writes:
> 

At the time TNE came out I'd been out of gaming for a while. I missed
the ENTIRE MT and Hardtimes era, much to my current regret. 

I did like some things /promised/ by TNE... 

One of the most important was exploration.. in my opinion CT had hemmed
the Imperium in too tightly and left no room for expansion or
exploration, I'd rather have seen corridors between the various
"empires" to allow more exploration and interact between the races as
they vied for ownership of new worlds (this was one of my house
modifications).

I also didn't agree with population EVERY world (ok, ok maybe it was
only most of them but it seem that the best worlds were already full, no
chance for colonization).

TNE when I first saw it, seemed to offer this, with Virus depopulating
the universe. Deeper reading of the later material dispelled this to a
point, most worlds were still populated, just with a devolved
technology. Still, since it was the unknown, exploration was again
possible.

I liked (loved) FFS and the alternate tech rules it contained. This
was/is something I believe Traveller has always and will always need! It
adds to the exotic feel of a race if they do "something different" than
the norm. 

What I didn't like...

THe rule set. I thought it was rather much clunkier than the original
Traveller. Not bad just much more complicated. I would rather have used
GURPS (which is as complicated but I already knew those rules.)

Virus was too powerful.

I countered this by projecting a high tech island that learned how to
"tame" Virus and turned it against itself.

There's more but that gives the idea.

MT and Hardtimes I've discovered since joining this list. I've kicked
myself repeatedly for missing some of the best of Traveller. THe setting
also allowed re exploration, by breaking the Imperium into smaller more
manageable chuncks. I agree that given the size of competing empires
there was a greater potential for war than wa ever used. This might have
been how it was to end with a strong leader finally re-uniting the
Imperium in the face of a true external threat. who can know.

It feels more "Traveller" than TNE did. to me. Not a jab, nor a flame,
just my personal opinion!

Anyway that's enough meandering for mow.
- -- 
Mike Peters
travelleri@home.com

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

Date: Sat, 02 Oct 1999 10:12:10 -0700
From: "Benyamene' ZeAbe' Akella" <xrp@sierratel.com>
Subject: Re: Re TNE/Nth RFW

> I liked (loved) FFS and the alternate tech rules it contained. This
> was/is something I believe Traveller has always and will always need! It
> adds to the exotic feel of a race if they do "something different" than
> the norm.

I've never seen FF&S, but perhaps this is the source I need. One of my very
few and very minor problems with Traveller is that all cultures, all races,
and all eras seem to use identical technologies, just to different degrees,
and perhaps a few cultural prohibitions. When I was running my short-lived
Star Wars campaign, I inserted technologies from every sci-fi game I had on
hand, and threw some house rules together to cover ideas I had read in
fiction. How close to CT is FF&S? What extras are covered? Is there a better
source book? How many editions of FF&S are there, and which is the "best"? I
would really like some guidelines for roughing out my "heresy zone" the
Farcast Sector.

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

Date: Sat, 2 Oct 1999 13:28:15 -0000
From: "Chris Seamans" <semo@pil.net>
Subject: Re: Optional Rules (was: GURPS Rules)

- -----Original Message-----
From: James W. Lindsay <jlindsay@home.com>
To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com>
Date: Saturday, October 02, 1999 3:53 PM
Subject: Re: Optional Rules (was: GURPS Rules)


>On Sat, 2 Oct 1999 00:35:50 EDT, GypsyComet@aol.com wrote:


>> This is also a problem in potential. As many a Rolemaster, Hero, or SFB
>> player (and a fair number of AD&D players) can attest, there is no such
thing
>> as an "optional rule." Every rule in the book, optional or not, stands a
good
>> chance of being used if a player benefits from it. GURPS has the same
>> problem. I don't consider this an automatically bad thing, but it takes a
>> certain level of gaming maturity to consciously NOT use rules.


I disagree that this is really a problem, since that's not the way GURPS is
really set up. The vast majority of the optional rules are intended to
impart a certain flavor upon a campaign world (the duelling rules and the
Wild West gunfight rules, for example).

If a GM is so weak-willed that he allows players to walk all over him with
optional rules, it's his fault, not the fault of the game system. Likewise,
if the players are incapable of understanding that the rules the GM uses for
his game are being used for a reason, again, it's their fault, not the fault
of the system.

James Lindsay said:
>Another problem with a system having so many optional rules is keeping
>track of which ones are actually being used.  This can be especially
>confusing when two or more campaigns are running simultaneously under two
>or more referees-- of which prefer different rule sets.


A minor problem, at best. Most people tweak the rules of whatever system
they're using anyway, and the use of optional rules (or even house rules)
has never really presented a problem as far as I've encountered, except
among the extremely immature.

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

Date: Sat, 2 Oct 1999 12:22:41 -0500
From: "Bont" <felix@felixcafe.com>
Subject: Re: Optional Rules (was: GURPS Rules)

> From: GypsyComet@aol.com
> 
> "Terry Carlino" <carlino@home.com> typed:
> 
> >The best thing about GURPS rules is that everything (practically) is
> >optional. You can fiddle with the rules and use just what you
> >want....
> 
> This is also a problem in potential. As many a Rolemaster, Hero, or
> SFB player (and a fair number of AD&D players) can attest, there is no
> such thing as an "optional rule." Every rule in the book, optional or
> not, stands a good chance of being used if a player benefits from it.
> GURPS has the same problem. I don't consider this an automatically bad
> thing, but it takes a certain level of gaming maturity to consciously
> NOT use rules.

Ain't that the Truth!  If a GM doesn't handle it properly, he can easily 
be accused of deliberately making the player's life a living H*ll if he 
doesn't allow an optional rule that benefits the player.


- - - -
FELIX (Thomas L Bont)

- - Encrypt your messages!
  That way only the government knows what you wrote!

- - It is truly the wise man that knows what he doesn't!

- - With your shield or on it ... (Old Spartan Blessing)

- - Fidelitas super omnia, honore excepto

- - Help Stop Forest Fires.  Outlaw Matches.

Be sure to visit The FELIX Cafe at
     http://www.felixcafe.com/

- - - -

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

Date: Sat, 02 Oct 1999 11:39:43 PDT
From: "Brandon Cope" <copeab@hotmail.com>
Subject: "Unofficial" Campaigns

How many out there have run campaigns with different settings? For example, 
when I first started GMing Traveller in 1983, I set my campaign some 400 
years in the future, after a civil war destroyed the 3rd Imperium (brought 
on by the assassination of the emperor, BTW), followed by a collapse of 
civilization, with a recovery starting at the beginning of the time my 
campaign covered. While a fellow GM/player _hated_ me doing this (he 
considered the CT setting perfect), it allowed me to create more 
exploration-minded adventures (technically re-survey, really) and keep the 
scope of the campaign smaller. Plus it meant that the actions of the players 
could impact the campaign. One other implication, since the new "empires" 
were rather small, was the scale of warships: 6000 tons was considered 
"dreadnaught" class -- not absurd considering the largest empire in the 
campaign covered a half dozen star systems.

A generous and sadistic GM,

Brandon Cope

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

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

Date: Sat, 02 Oct 1999 14:41:47 -0600
From: "David J. Golden" <goldendj@pcisys.net>
Subject: Re: Citizens of the TML (was: Traveller Player Roster)

At 11:13 PM 9/30/99 -0700, you wrote:
>> > It occurs to me that it would also be a good thing to compile a
>> > roster (name and location) of our fellow TML Travellers.  I'll
start
>> > it off...
>> 
>> I compiled a list of nearly 75 listees well over two years ago.
That time
>> it was Dave Nelson that got the ball rolling.
>
>Oops... that should have read "Dave Golden".

	Huh? Wha ...? Hey, you can't prove anything! There's no evidence,
there were no witnesses, I wasn't in the area, and there's no
controlling legal authority! Plus, I was never Mirandized, so nothing
I said can be used against me in a court of law ...

- -- The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights,
   shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained
   by the people.
   -- Amendment IX, US Constitution

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

Date: Sat, 2 Oct 1999 12:28:44 +0100
From: Mark Watson <markw@antares.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Re TNE/Nth RFW

On Sat, 02 Oct 1999, Chris Seamans wrote:
>-----Original Message-----
>Is that Dave Nilsen speaking, or the people of the former Third Imperium?
>That's an important distinction to make. If it's simply the opinion of an
>author, and he implausibly thrusts democratization into the setting, I can
>agree that it's a bad thing. However, if it can be rectified with other
>events in the storyline (such as a civil war between petty nobles that ended
>up killing billions, maybe even trillions of sophonts) the opinion of Dave
>Nilsen no longer matters as much.
>

Chris
Unless Dave Nilsen was claiming to be hearing the voices of Deneb's huddled
masses in his head (something which would explain alot), then I really think he
ought to take responsibility. That is to say, you're missing the point. We
could get into an argument about whether the regency democracy is plausible or
for that matter workable. Certainly the people of the former 3I didn't set it
up - the aristocracy, specifically Norris, had to surrender power.

But DN was the responsible author, and he is largely responsible for the far
more implausible and more sweeping changes (virus, the recharacterisation of
Norris and Strephon) that allow the democratisation to take place. In the
process he once again imposed his own, very different, view of Traveller on a
large number of GMs running CT/MT campaigns at the time, and who had been
repeatedly promised by GDW a place very similar to the classic imperium to ease
the transition to the new era. 

I recognise a number of people actually like the TNE setting, and a slightly
smaller number of people like the TNE rules. It remains the fact that GDW
seriously let down their "installed base", and to say that the changes in TNE
were dictated only by the circumstances of the setting is ridiculous.

Mark
- -- 
Mark Watson, markw@antares.demon.co.uk

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

Date: Sat, 2 Oct 1999 11:57:13 -0700
From: "Jason T. Barnabas" <cybernaut@netzero.net>
Subject: Re: Suliikarin Chrysalis escape pod

From: Richard Hough <rdhough@home.com> wrote:

>Hi Jason. Did you get my THUDDD entry? I sent it to you and the TML, but it
>never showed there.

Hi Richard (et al.),

No, I don't believe that I did get your entry.  I don't read
anything from the TML unless it has "THUDDD" in the
subject (I'm afraid I just don't have the time).

I now have the submission form on-line  and you can
submit your design on-line.  The Robots are even
finished!

If you submitted using a form that didn't have much in
the way of instructions (beta version) you will need to
resubmit (sorry, you know how it is with emerging
technology).
- --
Sincerely,

Jason Barnabas






________________________________________________________
NetZero - We believe in a FREE Internet.  Shouldn't you?
Get your FREE Internet Access and Email at
http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html

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

Date: Sat, 2 Oct 1999 21:05:55 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: Traveller Versions

Black ICE <wombat@premier.net> writes:
>I believe you meant to say "Books 1 thru _6_"....  ;-)
>
>(I have never looked at Books 7 or 8, so I don't know what utility they
>may have.)

I believe you meant to say "Books 1 thru _7_"....  ;-)

Book 7 is the Merchant Prince Supplement ie the expansion for Merchants
equivalent to Mercenary, HG, Scouts.

Book 8 is Robots and not really relevant as a core system. Striker is
equally applicable.

Dom

- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------
                       MiB - Marines in Battledress
   "Protecting the Imperium from the Scum of the Galaxy"
Rob Prior's Mac software @ http://www.bits.org.uk/ 

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

End of Traveller-digest V1999 #1153
***********************************

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
