<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #1477</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	12/10/99 7:09:24 PM Pacific Standard Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest     Friday, December 10 1999     Volume 1999 : Number 1477<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: The Rise and Supposed Decline of the RPG Empire<BR>
Re: Mr. Zeigler's first SJG book?<BR>
Moer advice please....<BR>
Re: Moer advice please....<BR>
Re: The Rise and Supposed Decline of the RPG Empire<BR>
Re the Gaming Industry<BR>
Re: Re Munchkins<BR>
Institutional Memory<BR>
Re: Re : electronic warfare<BR>
Re: Mass communication, the nobility and epistemology (LONG)<BR>
Re: Starfleet = Coast Guard<BR>
Re: Deadfall Ordnance and Falling Rocks (long)<BR>
Re: There goes our salvage... and car!..,<BR>
Re: Salvage One<BR>
Re:  One day, one day...<BR>
Re: Munchkins<BR>
Re: U-505 capture<BR>
Salvage One<BR>
Re: Paintball is not a real gun, much less a light crew served weapon<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 15:12:22 -0800<BR>
From: Keith Johnson <keithalanjohnson@home.com><BR>
Subject: Re: The Rise and Supposed Decline of the RPG Empire<BR>
<BR>
At 09:03 AM 12/10/99 -0500, you wrote:<BR>
>Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 16:55:51 +1000<BR>
>From: david.d.jaques-watson@centrelink.gov.au<BR>
><BR>
>I suggested to my FLGS that "SJG may be the saviour of Traveller", since it is<BR>
>the only company putting out Trav in any form with worldwide distribution.<BR>
><BR>
>They turned around and said, "Actually, Traveller may be the saviour of SJG",<BR>
>since many SJG supplements sit on the shelves for a L-O-N-G time before being<BR>
>bought, while the Trav stuff barely hits the shelves before it walks out the<BR>
>door. They have sold out of all the G:T stock they have ever brought in within<BR>
>the first 2-3 weeks (often sooner).<BR>
><BR>
>;-)<BR>
><BR>
>Comments, Keith?<BR>
<BR>
My response boils down to, YMMV.  Remember that different games sell better <BR>
or worse in different locations.  In the Bay Area, where I live, the sales <BR>
of GURPS is definitely below average.  On the other hand, I have had a lot <BR>
conversations with retailers across the country and quite a few of them <BR>
said that GURPS is one of their most reliable and constant sellers.<BR>
<BR>
The bottom line is this: ignoring the local scope and in the terms of raw <BR>
sales, GURPS is usually in the top four systems when it comes to game <BR>
products sold (next to AD&D, Vampire and Palladium).  GURPS has always been <BR>
fluctuating around in the top ten, but in the last few years it has been <BR>
solidly in the top five.  The "consistant three" (AD&D, Vampire, <BR>
Palladium), even though they regularly change position between who sold <BR>
more products, were almost always selling on the top three.  This year has <BR>
seen GURPS take the #3 position and bump Palladium to #4.<BR>
<BR>
My personal belief as to why GURPS is claiming more of the market is <BR>
because the layout quality of the books have increased dramatically <BR>
(without a reduction of the quality of the text) and the addition of <BR>
Traveller *as a line* (rather than a conversion book) to the lineup.  Not <BR>
only does GURPS Traveller pull in the "old school" CT diehards, but more <BR>
importantly it gives a constant stream of products around a central <BR>
setting.  Like I said before, selling a steady stream supplements is what <BR>
helps pay the bills.  SJ Games had climbed up to the top five selling RPG <BR>
lines without an officially supported game setting.  With the addition of <BR>
the Traveller line, and potentially additional Technomancer books, I have <BR>
no doubts that GURPS will stay in the top three position for a long time.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>Which supplements do your distributors say are most in demand?<BR>
<BR>
Magic, Psionics, and the Tech books are big and consistent sellers.  We <BR>
have also had tremendous success with books like Technomancer, Black Ops, <BR>
and of course, Traveller.  Keep in mind that I don't really deal with <BR>
distributors or pay that much attention to sales.  Our sales people could <BR>
answer that question much better than a webmonkey like myself.  :)<BR>
<BR>
_________________________________________________________<BR>
Rev. Keith Johnson      /\     keith@sjgames.com<BR>
Assistant Webmaster    /()\    keithalanjohnson@home.com<BR>
Steve Jackson Games   /____\   reverendkeith@hotmail.com<BR>
  IMTU tm+ t4+@ tg++$ ru- ge-@ st+ pi+ he+ dr+ hi-@ zh+<BR>
_________________________________________________________ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 15:27:08 PST<BR>
From: "Brandon Cope" <copeab@hotmail.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Mr. Zeigler's first SJG book?<BR>
<BR>
>From: "Chris Seamans" <semo@pil.net><BR>
><BR>
>From: <JFZeigler@aol.com><BR>
><BR>
> > That fits my experience too.  The first book I did for SJG (non-<BR>
> > Traveller) is still selling, but slowly.  _First In_ is zipping along in<BR>
> > comparison.  The biggest problem with the GURPS approach is<BR>
> >that any one worldbook probably has only a limited market.  Traveller<BR>
> >already has a big fan base, though.<BR>
><BR>
>What was your first SJG book?<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
GURPS Greece, and I bought it shortly after it came out.<BR>
<BR>
A generous and sadistic GM,<BR>
<BR>
Brandon Cope<BR>
<BR>
______________________________________________________<BR>
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 15:34:19 -0800 (PST)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: Moer advice please....<BR>
<BR>
>From: iSteve@outhere.f9.co.uk<BR>
<BR>
>SO on to my question....how much autonomy would an <BR>
>individual squad have?  <BR>
<BR>
I've never been in the military, but I've read some<BR>
good books, and if you want to read a good book about<BR>
a squad with a lot of autonomy, read Norman Mailer's<BR>
The Naked and the Dead, which is a<BR>
semi-autobiographical account of his experiences in a<BR>
recon squad in the Pacific during World War II.<BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Thousands of Stores.  Millions of Products.  All in one place.<BR>
Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.yahoo.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 10:42:35 +1100<BR>
From: "Jim & Peta Lawrie" <jimpeta@primus.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: Moer advice please....<BR>
<BR>
>SO on to my question....how much autonomy would an<BR>
>individual squad have?<BR>
<BR>
[Delurk, click!]<BR>
<BR>
    With the rise of reliable battlefield communications there is less and<BR>
less squad autonomy. Commanders can sit in orbit and watch close to real<BR>
time events unfold on their myriad displays and issue orders as needed (I'm<BR>
assuming orbital superiority but similiar systems can be emplaced.) Also, it<BR>
costs a lot to send a unit out with its advanced equipment and warbot grunts<BR>
and the lethality of the individual soldier has gone through the roof. One<BR>
trooper may well have the firepower of an earlier tech levels squad so less<BR>
troops may in fact be sent. This gives the CO less troops to oversee and<BR>
intensifies his control. These are just a few factors among many but I<BR>
thought I'd mention them.<BR>
    Jim L.<BR>
<BR>
[Relurk, click!]<BR>
"Where'd he go?"<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 18:53:15 -0500<BR>
From: "David L. Pulver" <dlpulver@kos.net><BR>
Subject: Re: The Rise and Supposed Decline of the RPG Empire<BR>
<BR>
>From: JFZeigler@aol.com<BR>
>Subject: Re: The Rise and Supposed Decline of the RPG Empire<BR>
<BR>
> quoting someone else...<BR>
>>  They turned around and said, "Actually, Traveller may be the saviour of <BR>
>SJG",  since many SJG supplements sit on the shelves for a L-O-N-G time<BR>
before <BR>
>> being bought, while the Trav stuff barely hits the shelves before it walks <BR>
>out the door. They have sold out of all the G:T stock they have ever<BR>
brought in <BR>
>> within the first 2-3 weeks (often sooner).<BR>
<BR>
I think this is called "growing the market". In some game stores, where<BR>
local GURPS interest is modest,<BR>
Traveller will pick up an additional market segment. (Our local game store<BR>
is an example). In others,<BR>
it will add to the existing GURPS market.<BR>
<BR>
>That fits my experience too.  The first book I did for SJG (non-Traveller) is<BR>
>still selling, but slowly.  _First In_ is zipping along in comparison.  The<BR>
>biggest problem with the GURPS approach is that any one worldbook<BR>
>probably has only a limited market.  Traveller already has a big fan base,<BR>
>though.<BR>
<BR>
For me, GURPS Trav Aliens I is selling fairly decently -- better than<BR>
obscure worldbook stuff I did, like Reign of Steel, but not as good as the<BR>
semi-core generic tech books, like Bio-Tech or Robots.<BR>
<BR>
_First In_ is not a worldbook, of course -- it's a sourcebook, and one with<BR>
a broad appeal far beyond Traveller, so it should do very well. I've been<BR>
recommending it to my non-Trav sf gaming friends.<BR>
<BR>
- -david<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
 _____________________________________________________________________<BR>
     David L. Pulver -- Senior Staff Writer and Assistant Line Editor,<BR>
		     Guardians Of Order Incorporated<BR>
             dlpulver@kos.net  http://www.guardiansorder.on.ca<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 16:00:36 -0800<BR>
From: Keith Johnson <keithalanjohnson@home.com><BR>
Subject: Re the Gaming Industry<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 09:45:31 -0900<BR>
>From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net><BR>
><BR>
> > Odds are their local game store doesn't have racks of DP9 books, and<BR>
> >if they do, I bet they don't have racks of Fading Suns, or Star Trek, or<BR>
> >...<BR>
>Mine does... all of the above, including separate sections for Tribe 8,<BR>
>Jovian Chronicles, and Heavy Gear. All the ST stuff is in one location.<BR>
>Fading Suns is also there.<BR>
<BR>
Consider yourself lucky that you are near a good store.  I am sure that <BR>
plenty of other DP9 fans are jealous of you.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>WOTC spent a lot of money consolidating the market. They found good ideas,<BR>
>bought them. Ars Magica. Talislanta. TSR.<BR>
<BR>
WotC killed most of the their RPG lines a couple years ago.  Everway, Ars <BR>
Magica and Talislanta were all dropped.  Rubicon picked up Everway, Atlas <BR>
Games picked up Ars Magica and Pharos Press has the Talislanta license.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>Almost everybody now plays one of the following, at least part time: D&D,<BR>
>Palladium Games, GURPS, Hero, WW-Storyteller. Idicators of a market<BR>
>correction.<BR>
<BR>
I would remove Hero from that list.  Champions was very popular in the <BR>
past, but it doesn't remotely get the sales that L5R or Deadlands has now.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>The market was getting too broad, and the die-off is a sign<BR>
>that the industry is HEALTHY, since the companies that  died made room for<BR>
>better ones, like DP9.<BR>
<BR>
I have to agree, DP9 is a great company.  Pity only two game stores that I <BR>
know of carries more than the basic books for it.<BR>
<BR>
Also, get ready for D&D3.  Each book will be priced very low, with the <BR>
intent to destroy smaller companies that can't afford to compete with the <BR>
price of the new version of D&D.  When you average gamer sees Seven Seas <BR>
for $30, and D&D3 to ~$20, talk a wild guess what is going to be bought on <BR>
average.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>  Linking Trav to one of the Survivors of the industry die-off insures it<BR>
>will survive. Much as *I* may think GURPS mechanics are Dated, annoying,<BR>
>and counter intuitive, it has the 3rd largest representation in stores of<BR>
>any line of RPG materials I've seen; GT therefore is a guarantee of<BR>
>Traveller surviving in some form for a long while.<BR>
<BR>
I disagree with your comment on the mechanics of GURPS, but everything else <BR>
I am in complete agreement with.<BR>
_____________________________________________________________<BR>
Rev. Keith Johnson      /\     keith@sjgames.com<BR>
Assistant Webmaster    /()\    keithalanjohnson@home.com<BR>
Steve Jackson Games   /____\   reverendkeith@hotmail.com<BR>
<BR>
        Everything you do is Zen  -- Bodhidharma<BR>
_____________________________________________________________ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 15:30:53 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Re Munchkins<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Coax them gently, and they tend to come around. The stubbornest I've met,<BR>
> however, was a man who was the non-gamer to his avid-gamer wife. He became<BR>
> a rules lawyer from HELL. So bad, in fact, that no one wants to game with<BR>
> him. And he'll only play AD&D 2nd, and only FR or DL settings, and won't<BR>
> tolerate even the minorest of house rules, deviations from print, or<BR>
> interpretations which conflict with his (unless backed up in Dragon).<BR>
<BR>
Anybody who tries *that* level of "rules lawyering" in a campaign *I*<BR>
am running will get shown the section of the rules that states the GM<BR>
is free to alter or interpret rules any way he chooses. If that doesn't<BR>
work, he or she will be shown the door.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 19:19:06 EST<BR>
From: GDWGAMES@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Institutional Memory<BR>
<BR>
Gentles,<BR>
<BR>
<<  Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 10:22:59 -0900<BR>
 From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net><BR>
 Subject: [none]<BR>
 <BR>
 >> Here's something posted by Bruce from over two years ago:<BR>
 >><BR>
 ><BR>
 >Damn, so _this_ is what it feels like to blow an aging roll...I don't<BR>
 >remember that at all!<BR>
 ><BR>
 >Bruce Johnson<BR>
 <BR>
 Welcome to the world of Institutional Memory. The IM of the TML seems<BR>
 fairly long... And, BTW, I remember that post from it's original posting to<BR>
 the TML... >><BR>
<BR>
Just out of curiouslty, who here remembers the controversy that erupted when <BR>
I first signed up to TML? <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 12:11:24 +1100<BR>
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: Re : electronic warfare<BR>
<BR>
Anthony Jackson wrote :-<BR>
<concise rebuttals snipped><BR>
Thank you.<BR>
<BR>
> >      Other possibilities include orbital infrared surveillance (low depth<BR>
> > ground penetrating systems are currently being evaluated), and<BR>
> > sophisticated optical sensors to track submarines by bioluminescence<BR>
> > from dinoflagellates disturbed by the vehicle's passage ; or, using<BR>
> > models of oceanic circulation to detect variances in wave patterns<BR>
> > caused by marine traffic(!).<BR>
><BR>
> I suspect these are highly dependent on knowledge of the exact ecosystem of the world's oceans.<BR>
<BR>
Not really. Some plankton analogues may fluoresce at specific<BR>
wavelengths when stimulated, just as Terran dinoflagellates do (observed<BR>
by poets, etc. writing about dolphins and the 'trails' they made in the<BR>
water a *long* time ago e.g. the ancient Greeks).<BR>
<BR>
Looking for current fluctuations just requires sufficient computing<BR>
power and appropriate sensors ; as you say, a typical starship should<BR>
have enough of both of these things.<BR>
(If it can be done *now*, with contemporary tech level gear and<BR>
ignorance about oceanography, it should be a snap at average Imperial<BR>
tech levels. <BR>
	Recall that the U.S. government was trying to limit Chinese access to<BR>
key concepts and hardware that would enable them to build such a<BR>
surveillance network at about the same time as the security leak at LLNL<BR>
became public, earlier this year).<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Robert O'Connor<BR>
Medico, Gamer<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 17:51:15 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Mass communication, the nobility and epistemology (LONG)<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Earlier this year, I read an article in _Smithsonian_ magazine (there, I've<BR>
> defined my source, so caveat reader) on the Amish.  Like many people, I had<BR>
> believed that their society had a simple blanket prohibition against all<BR>
> technology invented after, say, 1900.  The truth is both more complex and<BR>
> more interesting.<BR>
><BR>
> From memory:  any given technology is judged, and the decision made to<BR>
> adopt it or not (and if so, in what form), based on criteria like:  will<BR>
> this make a task *too* easy, devaluing the work and making the user lazy?<BR>
> Will it result in an intrusion on one's privacy?  Will it damage the<BR>
> cohesion of the family, or the community?<BR>
><BR>
> As an example, many Amish communities have a telephone shack, much like an<BR>
> outhouse.  Thus, one goes to the shack with the specific purpose of making<BR>
> or receiving a telephone call.  The shack has no heat and few concessions<BR>
> to comfort, so one is not tempted to just sit there on the phone and<BR>
> chatter about nothing.  And unwanted callers cannot metaphorically break<BR>
> down your door and invite themselves in to sell you something, even during<BR>
> dinner or prayer, as is the case for most of us with phones inside our<BR>
> houses.  Having been woken up this morning by a telemarketer for MCI, I<BR>
> must admit I see the appeal...<BR>
><BR>
> To bring this back on topic:  clearly, the Amish and other deliberately<BR>
> "backward" societies believe that there ARE negative consequences to<BR>
> blindly embracing every new gadget to come down the pike.  I suspect that<BR>
> this debate will become more and more important in every society as<BR>
> technology becomes more pervasive.  As cell-phones, telecommuting, on-line<BR>
> shopping, etc continue to erode the boundaries of our daily activities,<BR>
> concepts like "family time" and "vacation" are on the endangered-species<BR>
> list.  We all have to draw the line somewhere.<BR>
><BR>
> ObTrav:  PCs with wearable computers and headsets or, better yet, implants.<BR>
>  24-hour-a-day head spam.  Need I say more?<BR>
<BR>
Better ObTrav: You've just justified the existence of many of the low<BR>
TL worlds surrounded by worlds with high TLs. They don't *want* the<BR>
hassles of the higher TL!<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 17:57:08 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Starfleet = Coast Guard<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> I will try to put it down and post it this weekend. I actually had written <BR>
> it as an article for a fanzine article a few years back, but the files are <BR>
> on 5.25" on an Apple IIe.<BR>
><BR>
> By the way, do any of you Macheads on the list (Rob? Don?) know of a way to <BR>
> hook up my old IIe 5.25" floppy drives to my Mac Performa 630 to be able to <BR>
> transfer text files? Email me off list if you do (or on list if anyone else <BR>
> is interested.<BR>
<BR>
I think you can do it "backwards". You need to put a 3.5" drive on the<BR>
*Apple*. But I think you also have to be running ProDOS.<BR>
<BR>
Failing that, you can try to locate a PC user who owns a CopyIIPC<BR>
option board. This lets us fortunate few read things like 5.25 Apple<BR>
3.5" Apple & Mac disks on our PCs. <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 15:33:32 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Deadfall Ordnance and Falling Rocks (long)<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>>2) No energy _except_ gravitational potential energy. (Ie. just the energy<BR>
>>from dropping the rock, nothing added for orbital velocity, rotation of<BR>
>>location on planet, etc.)<BR>
<BR>
> This is a weaker assumption - almost all trajectories will retain a<BR>
> lot of its orbital velocity, much higher than the GPE.<BR>
<BR>
As I recall...<BR>
<BR>
GPE = 0.5 * M * (Ve(orbit) - Ve(surface))^2<BR>
<BR>
Where Ve is escape velocity. Unless that's one *high* orbit, "surface<BR>
orbital velocity" is going to be much higher than that "difference of<BR>
escape velocities" used to figure GPE.<BR>
<BR>
And "surface orbital velocity" is a good "first approximation" at<BR>
impact velocity for something launched at a ground target from orbit. <BR>
<BR>
More likely the object will impacy\t at the velocity of the orbit it<BR>
started from *plus* the difference in escape velocity between that<BR>
altitude and the surface. <BR>
<BR>
Objects launched from something orbiting the *star* rather than the<BR>
planet will impact at (at least) the difference in orbital velocities<BR>
around the star plus the difference in *system* escape velocity for the<BR>
two orbits. If one object was orbiting in the opposite direction, then<BR>
you *add* the orbital velocities.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 12:54:22 +1000<BR>
From: "The Roc" <roc@kewl.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: There goes our salvage... and car!..,<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: Jason T. Barnabas <cybernaut@netzero.net><BR>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Friday, December 10, 1999 4:03 PM<BR>
Subject: Re: There goes our salvage... and car!<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> > Walt has no $7999 and no car to show<BR>
> > for it!  This could quite well be the way these issues on stolen vessels<BR>
> and<BR>
> > salvage claims work in the Imperium?<BR>
><BR>
> Can Walt recover his money from the dealer who didn't<BR>
> do his homework?<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
By current Aussie laws, it's the buyer that has to do the homework.  If the<BR>
dealer was caught with the stolen car, he would lose.  If it wasn't<BR>
discovered until Walt bought it, he has no recourse at all.  The Auto Clubs<BR>
around Australia have been "trying" to get this law changed for the last 10+<BR>
years, but apparently aren't trying whole heartedly.  My sister fell foul of<BR>
this law in the early/mid 80's... and currently, a police officer friend<BR>
(copper mate), a detective, nearly got caught, but he discovered the car was<BR>
stolen before he purchased it.<BR>
<BR>
ObTrav: Here in Oz, there is a car buyer's ownership registry that is free<BR>
to dial into by prospective buyers to ensure the car they are buying is<BR>
freehold and not reported stolen, but people being what they are (often<BR>
lazy... errrr, I mean "to busy" to take the time), it isn't always used!<BR>
The registry has been in operation for about 10 years now, though I am not<BR>
sure if it is in all states, but it took years to implement at a local,<BR>
Continental-Island level... how difficult it would be to implement it across<BR>
sectors!!!<BR>
<BR>
But a direct answer to your question of "Can Walt recover his money from the<BR>
dealer who didn't do his homework?" would be, "No."<BR>
<BR>
- -- The Roc<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 20:57:44 -0600<BR>
From: "Bont" <felix@felixcafe.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Salvage One<BR>
<BR>
> <iSteve@outhere.f9.co.uk> wrote:<BR>
> <snip><BR>
> > I seem to remember a 70\'s TV show called \"Salvage One\"<BR>
> > where a junkyard owner and his improbably handsome sons<BR>
> > built a multi-use rocket IN THEIR BACK YARD which they<BR>
> > used to recover \"junk\" from the moon, and then to get into<BR>
> > all kinds of scrapes and adventures....<BR>
> ><BR>
> > Very realistic it was too.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > Anyone else remember this, or was it just an awful dream?<BR>
> <BR>
> I remember that show.  I loved it because it was a good<BR>
> blend of Old School SF (he built the Salvage One from<BR>
> junk in his back yard) and New School SF (about people,<BR>
> not technology).  IIRC, the engine that powered Salvage<BR>
> One ran on handwavium and the father was played by<BR>
> Andy Griffith (the same guy who played Sherrif Taylor on<BR>
> _Mayberry RFD_ and the title role in _Ben Matlock_).<BR>
> -<BR>
<BR>
It _wasn't_ handwavium [oh, the horror]!  It was Monohydrozine!  <BR>
And me and my buddy, Scotty Hicks, pestered the H*ll out of our <BR>
science teacher, Mr Brock, to help us produce some.  We never did <BR>
develop it but we did manage to make some pretty neat stuff out of <BR>
Potasium Nitrate (salt peter) and Powdered Sugar over a butane <BR>
stove in his garage.  Ah, those were the days :)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- - - -<BR>
FELIX (Thomas L Bont)<BR>
<BR>
- - Encrypt your messages!<BR>
  That way only the government knows what you wrote!<BR>
<BR>
- - It is truly the wise man that knows what he doesn't!<BR>
<BR>
- - With your shield or on it ... (Old Spartan Blessing)<BR>
<BR>
- - Fidelitas super omnia, honore excepto<BR>
<BR>
- - Help Stop Forest Fires.  Outlaw Matches.<BR>
<BR>
Be sure to visit The FELIX Cafe at<BR>
     http://www.felixcafe.com/<BR>
<BR>
- - - -<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 11:05:34 +0800<BR>
From: "Mick Bailey" <mickb@iinet.net.au><BR>
Subject: Re:  One day, one day...<BR>
<BR>
>dunny = head (toilet/loo/'fresher)?<BR>
<BR>
yep.<BR>
<BR>
>dome = bodily waste (fluid or fluid and solid)?<BR>
<BR>
dome = some (badly typed)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 18:12:00 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Munchkins<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> "Munchkin - Derogatory term referring to RPG players who is interested in<BR>
> minimising their disadavantages, maximising their advantages and having the<BR>
> coolest weapons and equipment. Role playing skills are not to the forefront<BR>
> here."<BR>
> ------------------------------------------------------<BR>
><BR>
> That sounds more like a powergamer to me.<BR>
><BR>
> To my mind a munchkin differs from a powergamer in that a powergamer works<BR>
> within the framework of the applicable rule system to create the most<BR>
> powerful character they can. Munchkins will ignore rules they don't<BR>
> like/understand.<BR>
<BR>
My experience is that "powergamers" work *within* the rules. Munchikins<BR>
work *in spite of* the rules. <BR>
<BR>
My knack for being able to remember even trivial rules well enough to<BR>
find them in a minute or less in rulebooks I'm familiar with meant that<BR>
munchkins tended to not get started in my games. Or even games I was a<BR>
player in. Y'see I had this bad habit of listening to a would-be<BR>
munchkin trying to tell the ref how XX says he can do this, and digging<BR>
out the appropriate rulebook/supplement and handing it to the GM while<BR>
pointing at the paragraph that says XX doesn't let the munichkin<BR>
do it that way. <BR>
<BR>
"Yes, I see that the rule *does* say XX. But I also see that it says<BR>
only left handed elves get that bonus. Since you are neither left<BR>
handed, nor an elf...."<BR>
<BR>
The best solution to folks who get carried away with "powergaming"<BR>
(assuming they've become a problem) is generally to expose them to some<BR>
players who *really* role play their characters. That usually gets to<BR>
them because it's obviously more fun and looks easier.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 18:25:37 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: U-505 capture<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Gallery wrote a book about his wartime experiences including the<BR>
> capture of the U-505. I don't recall the name of it but it's got a few<BR>
> giggles in it.<BR>
<BR>
Given the way the one piece of his "fiction" I've read ("Now Hear<BR>
This") reads, I wouldn't be a bit surprized.<BR>
<BR>
> The ObTrav. Do IN intelligence officers cringe whenever a hotshot<BR>
> Cruiser captain drags a prize into base? Or is the time lag between<BR>
> Losing a ship and finding out you've lost the ship make it unlikely<BR>
> that encryption procedures can be changed quickly enough? Or<BR>
> do Navies asume that ciphers will be compromised quickly anyway<BR>
> and change codes on a monthly or quicker basis? Is that even possible<BR>
> considering distances and travel times?<BR>
<BR>
Well, WWII drove home the lesson that you *have* to assume that the<BR>
*only* thing about your ciphers that the enemy *doesn't* know is the<BR>
current key. So nobody will be going after *equipment*, just the<BR>
storage media containing the code keys. <BR>
<BR>
These will be set up for easy self-destruct (try reading a CD that's<BR>
had a thermite charge set off on top of it :-). But it's still<BR>
*possible* to capture them as you want to wait until it's pretty<BR>
certain that you'll be taken before you destroy them. <BR>
<BR>
The size of the Imperium makes distributing code keys a real problem.<BR>
On the other hand, ship-to ship comm may be mostly by what Weber refers<BR>
to as "laser whiskers". This nor only means that you can get away with<BR>
fairly simple codes, but also that it's harder to spot you from comm<BR>
traffic. <BR>
<BR>
And then, of course, there's the question of whether or not public key<BR>
ciphers will endure the test of time. If they do, the situation changes<BR>
*greatly*. There's little *need* to change keys. All that capturing a<BR>
ship will give you is the ship's "private key" and those of the<BR>
officers and crew. Which means you can decode messages *to* them, and<BR>
fake messages *from* them. Which isn't really all that useful.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 18:37:48 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Salvage One<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>> I seem to remember a 70\'s TV show called \"Salvage One\" where a<BR>
>> junkyard owner and his improbably handsome sons built a multi-use<BR>
>> rocket IN THEIR BACK YARD which they used to recover \"junk\" from<BR>
>> the moon, and then to get into all kinds of scrapes and<BR>
>> adventures....<BR>
<BR>
"The Vulture has landed..."<BR>
<BR>
>> Very realistic it was too.<BR>
<BR>
Not really. They assumed a "superfuel that couldn't possibly exist,<BR>
when there were more realistic possiblities that would have worked.<BR>
<BR>
Of course, none of *those* gave them the chance of the ship going<BR>
"boom" by sheer bad luck. (No, a powerful rocket fuel *won't* be touchy<BR>
like nitro!)<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 18:52:52 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Paintball is not a real gun, much less a light crew served weapon<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> At 03:43 PM 12/8/99 -0500, you wrote:<BR>
>>At 03:32 PM 12/8/99 -0500, you wrote:<BR>
>>>  Paintball guns are not real, and they should be training for real, and <BR>
> for<BR>
>>>crew-served weapons, even if they are going into supply or admin...<BR>
>><BR>
>>This is certainly true, but still, you'd think they'd be better at <BR>
>>it...  Hmmm... Crew serviced paintball guns....<BR>
>><BR>
>>           -- Juliean Galak (a.k.a. Falcon)<BR>
>><BR>
>         We built a "mortar" using compressed air as propellant and a foam<BR>
> cup as the submunitions carrier....  you could get a hell of a lot of paint<BR>
> down on anybody dumb enough to try and defend the "castle" that was at the<BR>
> spot we played....<BR>
<BR>
I recall seeing a cartoon *somewhere* that had an officer "plastered"<BR>
to a jeep, with the remains of a basketball-sized paintball on his<BR>
chest. There was a tank on the opposite side of the panel. I think the<BR>
caption was "after testing, it was decided that paintball rounds for<BR>
tanks wouldn't work..."<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #1477<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-za04.mx.aol.com (rly-za04.mail.aol.com [172.31.36.100]) by air-za04.mail.aol.com (vx) with ESMTP; Fri, 10 Dec 1999 22:09:24 1900<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-za04.mx.aol.com (v66.4) with ESMTP; Fri, 10 Dec 1999 22:09:01 -0500<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id WAA23150;<BR>
	Fri, 10 Dec 1999 22:07:54 -0500 (EST)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Fri, 10 Dec 1999 22:07:26 -0500<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id WAA23073<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Fri, 10 Dec 1999 22:07:26 -0500 (EST)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 22:07:26 -0500 (EST)<BR>
Message-Id: <199912110307.WAA23073@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #1477<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
