Traveller-digest    Wednesday, October 13 1999    Volume 1999 : Number 1201



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: OT: You Got Me To Go There
Re: A couple of possible fixes for near-c rocks?
Re: A couple of possible fixes for near-c rocks?
Re: Does anyone play these games?
battledress and point defence
Re: Does anyone play these games?
Re: Tracers (was: Ammo Conservation)
Re: Many guns II
Re: Spraying near-c-rocks-B-gone liberally
Re: Does anyone play these games?
Re: battledress and point defence
The Near C Rock Accords II
RE: Traveller Versions
The Burning Bush (was:  Re: Ammo Conservation)
Re: Feudal Technocracy
Re: Ammo Conservation
re:  FFW players out there?
Warship Naming Conventions
Re: Warship Naming Conventions
Re: Warship Naming Conventions
Re: SEC: UNCLASSIFIED Was Re: GURPS errata now Graffiti
Re Task System vs Skill System [long]

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 22:08:20 -0600
From: cos 90 <cos90@powersurfr.com>
Subject: Re: OT: You Got Me To Go There

>Star Trek has a canon? When did this happen? They have trouble staying
>consistant from one episode to the next. 
>
>Who remembers first season ST:TNG when they killed Tasha Yar and she showed
>up in the next episode? According the the interviews I've read, the
>episodes were shown in the order they were filmed. So this little
>continuity error slip right past them.

I think the error may have been on the part of your local station,
which may have aired the episodes out of order. According to the
official episode guides, in the first season there were only three
episodes after the one in which they killed Tasha Yar -- and she
appeared in none of them.

That's the problem with syndication -- with hundreds of stations
showing the episodes, each scheduling them on their own, there is
bound to be a mishap here and there. (It's happened with my local
station at least twice that I can identify in the three modern-day
ST series.)

This is not to say that ST is otherwise self-consistent -- all the 
series are rife with contradictions, mistakes, and continuity glitches.
Then again, what TV series isn't? For some reason, Trekkies are more
obsessive about canon and continuity than any other series that I know
of. (You see the fans of Cheers getting that obsessive?)  :)


     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: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 21:27:54 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: A couple of possible fixes for near-c rocks?

>From: Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca>
>Subject: A couple of possible fixes for near-c rocks?
...
>2. Practical reasons.  One thing I implement IMTU is _highly_ visible jump
>flashes on entry combined with a randomization of vector on exit.  This
>means you can't "jump in" your rock at near-c with any real chance of
>hitting the target (you're at less than 1/million assuming you come in at

  Good fix - no more Killer Scoutships of Doom.

  It also makes life more awkward for intelligence ships - people in 
Mr. McKinney's TCS game will likely start realizing that the total #
of intel/dispatch vessels for the game runs into the many hundreds,
if not a couple of thousand.

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 23:39:17 -0500
From: Black ICE <wombat@premier.net>
Subject: Re: A couple of possible fixes for near-c rocks?

Steven Hudson wrote:
> 
> >From: Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca>
> >Subject: A couple of possible fixes for near-c rocks?
> ...
> >2. Practical reasons.  One thing I implement IMTU is _highly_ visible jump
> >flashes on entry combined with a randomization of vector on exit.  This
> >means you can't "jump in" your rock at near-c with any real chance of
> >hitting the target (you're at less than 1/million assuming you come in at
> 
>   Good fix - no more Killer Scoutships of Doom.
> 
>   It also makes life more awkward for intelligence ships - people in
> Mr. McKinney's TCS game will likely start realizing that the total #
> of intel/dispatch vessels for the game runs into the many hundreds,
> if not a couple of thousand.

Of course, AGIs (or other ships on intelligence missions) with black
globe generators could still jump in with impunity, unless this fix
supercedes the FFW rule allowing BGG-equipped ships to perform a "free"
action (due to their not being spotted coming in-system).  They simply
jump in with the black globe on full, wait until the jump-flash was
gone, then go into flicker-mode to adjust their vectors as needed.  Upon
reaching their in-system station, they go into low-emissions mode
(throttling back the power plant to reduce heat and neutrino emissions,
using PEMS rather than LIDAR or AEMS, etc.), and carry out their
mission.

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

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 22:07:21 -0700
From: Kristian Miller <travellerne@3rd-imperium.com>
Subject: Re: Does anyone play these games?

Luther Martin wrote:
> 
> A <em>house</em> in the Bay Area with a game room? I also live in the Bay
> Area, but am still in shock from the price I had to pay for a house with
> enough room for me, my wife, and two sons. To afford a <em>game room</em>
> you must make an incredible amount of money. Or at least more than I do.

Not really.  Life can be a series of compromises.  My wife wouldn't let
me have the master bedroom for my gameroom, but I did get to take over
one of the childrens' rooms provided I "let" them camp out in the
yard every night.  ;-)

Seriously though, I would be willing to host a Traveller boardgame fest
at my place.  I already have one person interested.

Kristian

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

Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 15:12:46 +1000
From: Cory Davis <c.davis@uws.edu.au>
Subject: battledress and point defence

Hi all

In our campaign, my players all own Battledress, the TL 12 DR240 standard
type (I agree totally with Doug, Scout/Commando Battledress is just wrong,
the most biffo version that exists IMTU is  Anthony Jackson's "sane"
battledress which I think is great -so do my players but they don't have
any yet)

Before you claim that I am being overun by rampant munchkinism, they are a
Licensed mercenary squad specialising in GTL12 PROFORS / Commmando work.
But that license wasn't cheap, neither is maintainance, those TL12 parts
can be pretty hard to get out in the boondocks of the Spinward Marches and
Imperial Authorities keep on giving them "Loyalty" missions just to check
their integrity heh heh

Anyway they have taken a quite a few hits from HEAT grenades and keep
asking about point defense for battledress, I was thinking something like a
back mounted pod turret that sits just above your head with a small PESA
and low powered(4d) high ROF xlaser with computer control should be able to
knock out most grenades, missiles and rockets at least as long as the range
wasn't too short. I don't know about conventional fired projectiles maybe
low powered only ?

what does everyone reckon, can it be done, if so how would you run it, or
do you think its drifting off into scout/commando BD territory ?

 To my way of thinking thats the great strength of plasma/fusion weapons,
apart from having enough armour there's not much you can do to stop them

I would use the 20mm APFSDSHD disposable railgun (20mm IAAW) that Doug made
ages ago to crack battledress

A few other things

slang we use in trav
a "cracker" - a weapon capable of penetrating BD
to "beam him down" - kill a man gunslinger style with a laser weapon

has anyone elses gaming groups come up with any cool slang for traveller ?

the gangsta style of pistol shooting is a good technique with wheelock and
flintlock pistols as it gives you a better chance of the pan igniting the
main charge-  maybe all those gansters just thought that highwaymen looked
cool- "Stand and Deliver" ha ha

Cory

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

Date: Wed, 13 Oct 99 00:32:42 -0500
From: "Eris Reddoch" <eris@pcola.gulf.net>
Subject: Re: Does anyone play these games?

On 10/11/99 at 02:08 PM,  "Sword Worlder" <swordworlder@clinic.net> said:

>Own them all, but have only played AHL.  Since I don't have a group I
>don't actually play the game now. <sigh>  how did I get started on
>this self-pity thing again?  Sorry.

I understand exactly how you feel.  If I wasn't in the PBEM
Traveller games I wouldn't be playing either.  I guess we just have
to find our games where and how we can. 

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

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 16:57:15 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Tracers (was: Ammo Conservation)

In mail you write:

> Shadow wrote:
>> Doug can probably give a better answer, but as far as I know, a
>> tracer is a normal round with a *small* hollow in the base opf
>> the bullet. The hollow is filled with the same sort of stuff
>> you use in colored flares. It doesn't have to be a lot, because
>> you don't really *care* if it burns more than second or two. 
>>
>> So it should pentrate as normal. With a slight chanche of igniting
>> anything flammable it lodges in (like a kevlar vest :-)
>
> Hmmm ... what about gauss weapons: could they have tracer ammo?

Two main problems. First, you need something to *ignite* the tracer
compound. With conventional firearms, the powder does this nicely.

Second, the projectiles for man portable gauss weapons tend to be
smaller in diameter, thus making it much harder to get a decent amount
of tracer compound into them.

One possiblity (that risks ruining the weapon) would be for "rail gun"
type weapons to fire titanium projectiles and somehow ignite them
(preferabbly as they leave the barrel! :-).

That would provide a nice tracer effect, and possibly make a decent
incendiary round. Especially from larger caliber weapons. :-)

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

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 18:16:32 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Many guns II

In mail you write:

>> were made.  The Chinese versions were even more flighty.  I wouldn't even 
>> wanna *LOOK* at an Afghani monkey copy let alone shoot it.

From everything I hear, the hand-made Afghani copies of just about
*any* gun are just as good as the original, unless the original
requires special steels.

I recall that one of the problems the British had was the first Enfield
captured and copied was the *sniper* model. :-)

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

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 18:59:45 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Spraying near-c-rocks-B-gone liberally

In mail you write:

> The latter.  HEPlaR is unrealistically efficient -- above 100% depending
> on how you model it -- but at least it acts like a physically consistent
> drive system.  On the other hand, t-plates as written violate conservation
> of energy, which is why you can use the 'free' energy obtainable from them
> to crack planets easily.  Any patch to t-plates that closes this loophole
> ends up making them behave like HEPlaR, or worse.
>
> However, an important part of the Traveller 'feel' (IMHO, and excluding
> TNE) is what I call the "magic carpet" model of normal-space ship
> operations.  Moving around in a solar system basically consists of aiming
> the nose where you're headed and thrusting, flipping over halfway, and
> decelerating to the target.  Considerations of gravity, orbits, and so
> forth disappear when you can thrust at 1 g or above for a month at a time.
>
> Conversely, in the HEPlaR model one is constantly watching the fuel gauge,
> and getting from A to B must be done in the JPL way (though hopefully
> without help from LockMart), using a a few burns and a lot of coasting on
> a transfer orbit.  Needless to say, this is both harder to model and takes
> a lot more (in-game) time.

The thing is, HEPlar, or even a more reasonable fusion rocket only
requires you to "watch fuel" *closely* if you try doing "absurd" things
with it. Like making normal space trips longer than a week.

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

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 22:43:58 -0700
From: "Luther Martin" <martin@ksarul.com>
Subject: Re: Does anyone play these games?

Sign me up. I'm in San Jose, which may require fighting lots of traffic.
- ----- Original Message -----
From: Kristian Miller <travellerne@3rd-imperium.com>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 1999 10:07 PM
Subject: Re: Does anyone play these games?


>
>
> Luther Martin wrote:
> >
> > A <em>house</em> in the Bay Area with a game room? I also live in the
Bay
> > Area, but am still in shock from the price I had to pay for a house with
> > enough room for me, my wife, and two sons. To afford a <em>game
room</em>
> > you must make an incredible amount of money. Or at least more than I do.
>
> Not really.  Life can be a series of compromises.  My wife wouldn't let
> me have the master bedroom for my gameroom, but I did get to take over
> one of the childrens' rooms provided I "let" them camp out in the
> yard every night.  ;-)
>
> Seriously though, I would be willing to host a Traveller boardgame fest
> at my place.  I already have one person interested.
>
> Kristian
>

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

Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 00:54:46 -0500
From: Black ICE <wombat@premier.net>
Subject: Re: battledress and point defence

Cory Davis wrote:
> 
<<snip>>
> 
> Anyway they have taken a quite a few hits from HEAT grenades and keep
> asking about point defense for battledress, I was thinking something like a
> back mounted pod turret that sits just above your head with a small PESA
> and low powered(4d) high ROF xlaser with computer control should be able to
> knock out most grenades, missiles and rockets at least as long as the range
> wasn't too short. I don't know about conventional fired projectiles maybe
> low powered only ?

Well, point defense weapons on powered battledress are included in the
T4 designs in both _Central Supply Catalog_ and _Emperor's Arsenal_
(both at TL-12), so I see no problem with the concept.  A very cursory
look at LB Books 1 and 4 give no details about the presence or absence
of PD mounts on powered battledress.  I don't own MT or TNE, so I can't
say yea or nay about PD weapons in those systems.
> 
> what does everyone reckon, can it be done, if so how would you run it, or
> do you think its drifting off into scout/commando BD territory ?

PD systems on powered battledress make sense to me, for all echelons of
powered BD use.
> 
>  To my way of thinking thats the great strength of plasma/fusion weapons,
> apart from having enough armour there's not much you can do to stop them

In T4, if one is willing to pay the penalties in power requirements and
sensor degradation, one can install electrostatic armor against any form
of plasma penetration (HEAT rounds and plasma/fusion guns).  I don't
know about other versions of Traveller concerning this matter.

<<snip>>

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

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

Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 16:23:34 +1000
From: dadams@parracity.nsw.gov.au
Subject: The Near C Rock Accords II

This documet is a second verison of the NEAR C Rocks accords, an attempt to
justify the use of NEAR C Rocks , Moons, and other planets as weapons.

The Imperium explicitly bans two types of weapons systems for use of any
organisation within Imperial Space (Internal and External). They are the Hyper
Velocity Planetary Bombardment system (HVPBS) and the Large Mass planetary
Bombardment System (LMPBS). These are generally refereed to as Planetary Bombard
Systems (PBS), which is a misnomer, as they can be used against any target in
space, including vessels.

The definitions of these systems are intentionally ill-defined, as to cover any
possibility of variations.

Hyper Velocity Planetary Bombardment Systems (HVPBS) and Large Mass Planetary
Bombardment Systems (LMPBS)  ,  like Nuclear Warheads , are reserved for
Imperial forces only. Except that since Imperial Order 1109 , the use of said
weapons is barred as a first use weapon. The Imperium reserves the right to
respond in kind to any attacks used on its member worlds or installations, but
the use of it as a first strike by party will GUARANTEE response from the
Imperium

As per IO1109, and admended by IO2045, use of HVPBS must be authorised by the
Emperor or Archduke ON IMPERIAL STATIONARY. The Imperium that the use of HVPBS
is a political weapon, thus no Imperial Officer can initiate use of this system.
The penalty is loss of all assets, up to and including his/her life.

The United Planets (precursor to the Terran Confederation) is the first
Interstellar organisation barring the use of what it termed "Lensmen" scale
weaponry (it is generally believed to refer to a war before contact with the
Vilani between the Boskone and Arista nations). It is interesting to note that
the Vilani never envisioned PBS weaponry, and was stunned to learn that the
Terran Confederation actually considered to use them, until the tide of the war
turned to their favour. It was some indication of the alarm that the Vilani
caused in the TC that war crimes was considered necessary to "equalise" the
numerical advantage that the Vilani was perceived to have. Saner minds
eventually convince the TC that letting the Lensmen Weapons loose would infact
jeopardise the Terrans (as they had less planets to lose).

Informal discussions with the Zhodani during the conclusion of the First
Frontier Wars agreed that both sides will informally acknowledge that HVPBS and
LMPBS will not be used by either side. Of all the Major races, only the Kree do
not publicly renounce the use of HVPBS and LMPBS. However all Starfaring nations
near the Kree have advised the Kree that any use of the HVPBS and LMPBS will be
met in kind, and it is rumoured that both the Solomani and Imperial forces have
a class of ship based near Kree space solely designed to accelerate projectiles.
Of cause, both the Solomani and Imperial Governments deny this.

The dictates of IO1109 was only activated once. During the Jesma trade war  of
894, planet X (XXXX, YYYYYYY Sector) atempted to hamper the industrial and
manpower advantage of planet Y (XXXX,  YYYYYYYSector), by attempting to drop a
HVPBS (the asteroid 'Vengeance') on planet Y's main contenant. The Imperial
Scout Service manage to get wind of the attempt, immediately activated every
scout in the subsector, and launched a pre-emptive assault on Vengeance,
distroying the installation. The Imperial Navy and Marines then proceeded to
deploy Nuclear Weapons on planet X until the government surrendered
unconditionally. The surviving planetary Council was immediately executed, and
the State religion (which proposed the use of the HVPBS) was suppressed (and
many of its hierarchy executed as well). Planet X is still under Imperial
control as of 1120.

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

Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 08:19:07 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: RE: Traveller Versions

"Joseph R. Dietrich" <yikes@evansville.net> writes:

>This is all true. But since it would be fairly easy to bolt a task system
>onto GURPS, why is this such a big deal? Simply use standardized modifiers,
>and go for it.

Exactly. The reason for my post was in response to David Summer's complaint
that people were putting GURPS down on this topic. I tried to expalin why
GURPS skill system didn't feel like a task system to some ex TNE/MT/T4
players (something that the original poster who prompted David's ire
actually felt I clarified from his post). David has since claimed that
GURPS has a such a system. I couldn't find it so am looking forward to
receiving a Digest with its page reference in.

This lack of task system prompted us to look at it for GURPS - the reason
the system we adopted for GURPS is centred on 'Difficult' is that the
numbers balance out between versions better (Andy L did some work on
probability before settling on the numbers we're using for the BITS sytem.)

The irony in complaining about peoples' attitude to GURPS is that until now
it's been (deservedly) getting an easier ride than T4 did. Personally, I
think that GT is good for Traveller, provided T5 can hook into it.

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/ 

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 23:01:35 -0700
From: "Glenn M. Goffin" <gmgoffin@pacbell.net>
Subject: The Burning Bush (was:  Re: Ammo Conservation)

> From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
> Subject: Re: Ammo Conservation ( was Re: Firing two guns at once)

> Hmmm. Assume the PCs are in someplace with a semi-desert climate. Lots
 
> Or even just a prairie/steppe area during the latter part of summer.
> Remember, in the "wild" state there are lots of places where the grass
> is 8-10 feet tall!

Poul Anderson wrote a Dominic Flandry story in which he decides to get
rescued by setting fire to the steppe, which is the only resource on
that planet.  His analysis is that both warring factions will cooperate,
or at least not interfere, with each other's fire control efforts.  Then
he hopes he's closer to those he's running toward than those he's
running from.

- --Glenn

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 23:10:11 -0700
From: "Glenn M. Goffin" <gmgoffin@pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: Feudal Technocracy

> From: "Sword Worlder" <swordworlder@clinic.net>

> This is great stuff.  Got me itching to build an FT.  Wouldn't it make a
> great module?  You could get into all sorts of trouble :-)  Sort of a Lord
> Kalvan of Otherwhen storyline.  Or how about a first contact / first in
> scenario where the whole system is shaken to it's foundations by the
> arrival of GTL-11 IISS.  no wait, i should probably build it before I destroy it,
> right?

You could build it and have your PCs grow up in it and run a campaign
entirely in it -- and then have the IISS arrive.  Now your PCs have a
very interesting set of motivations to play out.  

- --Glenn

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 23:22:06 -0700
From: "Glenn M. Goffin" <gmgoffin@pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: Ammo Conservation

> From: "Chris Seamans" <semo@pil.net>

> >Actually (remember, Doug was  a sniper) in proper camoflage, what he
> looked
> >like was a rather skinny shambling mound.
> >
> >With glasses. ;-)
> 
> Ach! Any AD&D players would run in terror from such a sight! ;)

Ye Fighter:  I like not the sight of yon skinny, shambling mound.  Let
us quit this place.
Ye Mage:  Truly, I find it not recorded in my tomes of demons and
demigods.  It is not of this plane.  
Ye Cleric:  I detect evil in it, just from looking at it. I need not to
cast the spell.
Ye Thief:  You brave heroes fall back in good order.  I'll hide here in
the tall grass and try to steal that bitchin' .50 cal. sniper rifle!

- --Glenn

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

Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 00:10:09 -0700
From: "Glenn M. Goffin" <gmgoffin@pacbell.net>
Subject: re:  FFW players out there?

> From: "Luther Martin" <martin@ksarul.com>
> Subject: FFW players out there?
 
> To any Fifth Frontier Way players out there, what do you think of the =
> potential for this game to be automated, so that it could be played =
> either player to computer or by e-mail? What elements require immediate =
> player interaction and would degrade the game if removed or modified?
> 
> While I am at it, I am also pondering implementing a Mayday-lilke game =
> on the Palm Pilot. Any thoughts on game design or GUI design?

I have for years been thinking about how to do Fifth Frontier War -- or
Traveller interstellar war in general -- in a way that captures the
feeling of not knowing where the enemy is.  Granted, I've been
considering it for a map-and-counters game, not computer, but a computer
game might be the way to go.  I think the most important flavor of
Traveller interstellar war is the nature of intelligence about both
enemy and friendly units.  

Here's how I visualize it:

The player takes the role of the senior admiral in the action, and
starts with a fleet at a major world.  The map available to the player
shows every star system with all naval, military, and scout
dispositions.  Each disposition is dated, and, at the advanced level,
credited.  

So I'm at Rhylanor on 1-1107.  My map shows me that the 193rd Fleet is
there as of 1-1107, and that information came from personal observation
(which is another problem that I won't address). My map also shows me
that the 212th Fleet is at Efate, as of 350-1106, and that information
came from or is confirmed by regular Imperial Navy channels, Imperial
Naval Intelligence, Office of Naval Intelligence, and IISS.  The Zhodani
43rd Fleet is at Riverworld as of 300-1106, according to Imperial Naval
Intelligence, but no one else.  So you have a problem of which
information is correct, as well as how old it is.  

The computer would take over control of scout squadrons and individual
scout ships, although the player should be able to set some general
parameters (focus on internal reporting vs. behind enemy lines, e.g.). 
The scouts will report their observations to the internal intelligence
network, which will eventually filter up to the player.  

The player would send orders to his units, which would eventually maybe
get the orders and maybe obey them if they still made sense and the unit
had enough morale.  Then the player would maybe get a report of what
happened (probably brought by a scout). Still, the after-action report
would not arrive for weeks after the action.  

I wonder if this hyper-realism would be fun to play?

- --Glenn

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

Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 00:29:27 -0700
From: "Glenn M. Goffin" <gmgoffin@pacbell.net>
Subject: Warship Naming Conventions

> From: Black ICE <wombat@premier.net>

> How do y'all come up with names for warships?

Isn't there a Ministry of Ship Names (mentioned in Lightning Class
Cruisers, I think)?  I wonder what their regulations say.  The Traveller
universe is so big, so old, and full of so many different classes of
ships that almost any name is possible.  I tend to draw inspiration from
canonical sources (LCC/AHL, Fighting Ships, Traders and Gunboats, etc.)
and history.  

In the gas of Uranus:
"Sir, I've got a big squadron of Solomani Confederation ships jumping in
at extreme range.  Cruisers and some smaller vessels... I think the
cruisers are the Adolf Hitler and the Genghis Khan .. and ... um ... the
William Jefferson Clinton.  That really big one is the dreadnaught
Dingir, and those are the troop carriers Pennsylvania and Guangzhou. 
The frigates are ... um ... the Pele, the Fafnir, the Shugashiika, and
the Tengu."

- --Glenn

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

Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 01:27:15 -0700
From: "Legate Legion" <legate@futureone.com>
Subject: Re: Warship Naming Conventions

From: Glenn M. Goffin <gmgoffin@pacbell.net>
Subject: Warship Naming Conventions

>In the gas of Uranus:


    That sounds a bit rude.

Legate Legion
ICQ # 8973001
legate@futureone.com

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

Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 01:27:15 -0700
From: "Legate Legion" <legate@futureone.com>
Subject: Re: Warship Naming Conventions

From: Glenn M. Goffin <gmgoffin@pacbell.net>
Subject: Warship Naming Conventions

>In the gas of Uranus:


    That sounds a bit rude.

Legate Legion
ICQ # 8973001
legate@futureone.com

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

Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 00:54:18 +0100
From: Ewan Quibell <E.D.Quibell@bton.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: SEC: UNCLASSIFIED Was Re: GURPS errata now Graffiti

Benyamene' ZeAbe' Akella wrote:
> 
> > 'I AM THE ANGLE OF DEATH'
> 
> I wonder how many degrees that would be?

I have to confess .... it was me ;-)
- -- 

   Ewan Quibell                       Their's not to make reply,
   Senior Communications Engineer     Their's not to reason why,
   Computer Centre                    Their's but to do and die:
   University of Brighton             Into the valley of Death
                                      Rode the six hundred.
   E.D.Quibell@brighton.ac.uk              Alfred, Lord Tennyson

   #include<stddisclaimer.h>

   My spelling is entirerly due to dyslexia, typos, and poetic license

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

Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 05:47:14 -0400 (EDT)
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: Re Task System vs Skill System [long]

>Compare the following:
>
>  To make yourself understood on the net:
>  Formidable, Liaison, 5 min (fateful, unskilled OK)
>  [David rolls 6 on 2D, adds his Liaison-1 and compares with 15. Oops!]
>
>and
>
>  GM: "Roll against Diplomacy at -6."
>  [John subtracts 6 from his Diplomacy-9 and compares with a 3D roll of
>   12. Rats!]
>  GM: "There's a flamewar a-brewing..."
>
>The only difference I can see is that MT has a convenient shorthand for
>writing down the task definition. Since (like most non-combat tasks)
>this probably wasn't defined in a supplement somewhere, that doesn't
>seem a vital feature. The MT Referee probably thought something like "I
>don't rate his chances - let's make it a Formidable task", while the
>GURPS GM thought "wow, that's tricky - let's give him a -6".
>
One of the things is that the task system is a VERY convenient shorthand...

By defining certain parameters one has a consistant memorable mechanic:
Difficulty
two modifiers (Usually one att DM and one skill, sometimes two skills,
	sometimes two atts), which are used both to increase success chances
	and reduce time taken.
a time increment (1/10 the expected time for a person with a total mod of 1,
	to wit, skill 0 (minimal/familiarity, rather than no skill) and
	att 5-9 (for DM+1).
and the following boolean flags (indicated only when set to true):
	Safe: No mishaps
	Hazardous: Mishaps are no more common, but more dangerous
	Fateful: any fail is a mishap
	Unskilled OK: no penalty for lacking a requisite modifier
	Confrontation: If present, list the modifiers opposing
	Uncertain: Player roll determines whether or not he knows how well
		he did.
	Absolute: The time shown is a fixed time, not a time increment, and
		no time roll is used, therefore skill has no effect on time
		taken.
Several of the tasks are very easy for me to remember, specifically many of
the starhip operation tasks (defined in MT Imp Encyc). The combat tasks
were quite well laid out, and far more mnemonic than the CT or Striker/AHL
Equivalents.

And because the basic interpersonal tasks are listed as well, including the
effects on reactions, the system had a broad repetoire of some 40
predefined non-combat tasks, in a consistant, memorable, mnemonic based
setup. Yes, some of the granularity was sacrificed. The effects of lack of
skill were one consistant mechanic, rather than a series of "Defaults" ala
GURPS. The effects of skill on time taken were one consistant mechanic.
Lacking appropriate tools? In GURPS, the modifier may vary from skill to
skill; in MT, increase difficluty 1 step. Things like this, where the Task
system is a set of modifiers shared by all situations (admittedly,
sometimes not quite right for certain types of play), rather than the
various and seldom clearly presented modifiers presented throughout GURPS...

Some comonalities between GURPS' skill system and MT's Task System:
Consistant rules for exceptional success and failure. Self Consistant
methods of useing attributes in resolving skill use (albeit very different
ways; TNE is more similar).

The MT task system also had several other secondary mechanics in other
locations than the basic rules: Expanded interpersonal tasks in the
Referee's Gaming Kit (DGP), Expanded Sensor Rules in WBH (DGP), Expanded
and more detailed ship operation rules in SSOM (DGP), Low Tech craft launch
expansions in Hard Times (GDW), and the Research and Large Scale combat
systems in the MT Ref's Companion (GDW).
These were more than just collections of tasks, but all three included some

In TNE, several more interesting "Addenda" arise: Take a look at world
tamer's handbook.

GURPS lacks a consistant effect of Skill on Time Taken. 2300 and MT had a
consistant system. TNE dropped the time roll.

Also, once players understand how to use the task system, the Cautious and
Hasty modifiers really come into their own... players, when presented with
"To open the airlock Iris manually: Difficult, Str, Mechanical, 1 minute;
semi-safe" they know that a skill 2 Str 7 character should be able to do it
in roughly 8 minutes, and needs the right tools, and that mishaps, if any,
will be very mild (I added semi-safe to mean roll mishaps on only 1d rather
than the normal 2). Most would go ahead and take the extra time (cautious
task), knowing that it moves if from about 8 minutes to about 16, and from
roughly 45% chance of success (using above stats) to about 85% or so
(Needing a natural 8+ to Natural 4+). Explaining all the ramifications in
GURPS terms is less concise, and even breaking them down to plain english
is wordy.


Someone I know once compiled a file with all the MT tasks in print in
challenge, the GDW published MT products, the DGP MT products, and TD
through #18... he found over 100 distinct tasks.

In conclusion, Yes, the MT Task System is just an elaboration of a skill
system. No it is not JUST a skill system. GURPS has a system for
determining success or failure, including critical success and critical
failure; it lacks *consistant* sets of modifiers for not JUST difficulty
but also: lack of tools, hasty attempts, cautious attemps, modifiers to
chances of mishap other than skill level, a consistant and simple (and
easily memorized) unskilled penalty.

Yes, I remember that Katana defaults to Broadsword-2. But I can't remember
the modifier for defaulting from Dex to either Broadsword or Katana, nor
the penalty for Physics defaulting from IQ, nor the dozens of of other
defaults on the over 100 skills listed in Compendium-1; I have trouble
remembering which attribute a skill is assigned to under TNE. But in MT, I
know that basic ship operations are in Imp Encyc, in the section on
travelling. I know that sensor tasks are defined in WBH, and can loook them
up in a few seconds, and they satnd out in the text. I know also that the
Task definitions for interpersonal tasks are on the screen, and the
estimation tasks are also right there as meta-tasks (tasks with a range of
possible applications, but one definition). I know that to get passive
cooperation from a hostile (but not immediately violent) guard, the
character needs a critical success on the task roll to shift him two steps,
and getting active cooperation will require quite a while as the repeated
task attempt rules take over...

The task system, once understood, becomes a key to unlocking the game from
lists of modifiers or arbitrary modifiers. it becomes a major shared
frameowrk to reduce the arbitrarieness, and decrease the time needed to
impart a wealth of details. I loan new players a photocopy of the Player's
Guide to Tasks from the Player's Manual... 1 page, and it tells them what
they need to roll, and how to break down the code used in play. As a gm, I
use the task system, and have found it to be a cornestone of good gm'ing.
Also, since I use a few tweaks, the sheet I hand out has the modifications
I use on it: att/3 (vs att/5 official), increased difficulties (Shift them
up 1 point), and max DM +10 (vs +8 official except for psionics) including
for psionics tasks, and the semi-safe description is sometimes pencilled in.



William F. Hostman  |  "Smith & Wesson: THe original Point and Click
interface!"
Aramis 0602 C55A364-C S kk+ as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge-
533
Mailto:aramis@gci.net http://home.gci.net/~aramis http://www.alaska.net/~mhaa
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis	ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn- t4-- tt+ to- tg-- ru+ ge 3i+ c+ jt-() au+ st- ls
pi+() ta+ he+(-) kk+ as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge- pi+

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

End of Traveller-digest V1999 #1201
***********************************

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
