<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #1558</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	12/22/99 7:10:15 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    Wednesday, December 22 1999    Volume 1999 : Number 1558<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: Benedict Arnold (was: Re: OT), come to think of it, it probably still is.<BR>
Re: England<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #1555<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #1556<BR>
Re: How much should a starship cost<BR>
Re: Freedom <BR>
Re: The Death of Q<BR>
Re: England<BR>
Re: In Jokes<BR>
Re: Freedom<BR>
Re: England<BR>
Re: 3 words, and Homeworld (was Re: Travshorts IV)<BR>
Change of Command<BR>
USIP<BR>
Re: Mars Exploration<BR>
Re: [OT] War of 1812<BR>
Re: The Death of Q<BR>
OT: ToP-123<BR>
Re: In Jokes<BR>
Re: United States<BR>
Re: [OT] War of 1812<BR>
Vargr, Just for Kicks (was Re: In Jokes)<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 20:11:32 -0500<BR>
From: Bill Rutherford <worj@home.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Benedict Arnold (was: Re: OT), come to think of it, it probably still is.<BR>
<BR>
At 02:38 AM 12/22/1999 -0800, Jason wrote:<BR>
<Snip>...<BR>
Actually, Benedict Arnold was a *True Patriot*, he was a<BR>
leader who distinguished himself in many ways before<BR>
he had a change of heart.  ...<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
History Undercover (History Channel) just showed Spies of the American <BR>
Revolution last night, which gave a good account of Arnold's career - there <BR>
are some parts to it that nobody even suspected until papers were uncovered <BR>
in the 1930s or so...  Margaret Shippen, his wife, was a British agent and <BR>
seems to have been the highest paid British (or even American, for that <BR>
matter) spy on the continent!<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Bill Rutherford<BR>
worj@home.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 01:12:24 -0000<BR>
From: "Matthew Bond" <mgb@akira.swinternet.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: England<BR>
<BR>
- -----Original Message-----<BR>
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Date: 23 December 1999 00:56<BR>
Subject: Re: England<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
On 22 Dec 99, at 22:29, Matthew Bond wrote:<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
> -----Original Message-----<BR>
> From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
> <snip><BR>
> >butts kicked in wars with people you used to hire as mercenaries<BR>
><BR>
> >--Glenn<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> errr.... no I'm stumped... enlighten me<BR>
<BR>
Until after the American Revolution it was British practice to employ<BR>
German mercenaries to do their fighting for them. A number of german<BR>
princes supported their lifestyles by hiring out their subject to die<BR>
for the brits.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
Rupert Boleyn <paradise.net.nz><BR>
Wellington, New Zealand<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------<BR>
I see...<BR>
<BR>
And how many wars with the Germans have we lost? (to me, "getting our butts<BR>
kicked" implies losing...)<BR>
<BR>
Matt<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 20:12:08 EST<BR>
From: GDWGAMES@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #1555<BR>
<BR>
In a message dated 99-12-22 18:29:06 EST, you write:<BR>
<BR>
<< >BTW. I don't have _Invasion:Earth_. Is there no evidence that bears on <BR>
this<BR>
 >question to be gleaned there?<BR>
 ><BR>
 Not really. The _I:E_ rules are sadly lacking in color/fill text. Really<BR>
 playable, tho. The map shows NO boundaries, a few starports, and<BR>
 urbanization re >><BR>
<BR>
Like I said earlier, don't take the map as gospel to the millimeter. <BR>
<BR>
LKW<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 20:24:17 EST<BR>
From: GDWGAMES@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #1556<BR>
<BR>
In a message dated 99-12-22 19:01:23 EST, you write:<BR>
<BR>
<< Be durned if he wasn't right.  Notice how little has<BR>
 changed under the "Communists" today.  It seems every<BR>
 day China gets more and more like it has traditionally<BR>
 been.  I guess that China is a good example of just what<BR>
 "cultural inertia" really means.<BR>
 - -- >><BR>
<BR>
I don't know if this is true or a fable, but it is interesting if it is true:<BR>
<BR>
When the Communists finally took over, the renamed the Manchu (I'm working <BR>
from memory here, so don't jump all over me if it's wrong) gate the People's <BR>
gate. The workmen who took down the old brass plate with the name on it <BR>
decided that this people's stuff might not last, to they decided to take the <BR>
plate up into the "attic" of the gate, just in case it was needed again soon. <BR>
They found a similar plate carved with the name of the previous dynasty, <BR>
indicating the workmen of a couple of centuries ago had similar thoughts.<BR>
<BR>
Like I said, maybe a legend, but interesting if true.<BR>
<BR>
LKW<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 19:15:08 -0600<BR>
From: Richard Wilson <rtwilson@rollanet.org><BR>
Subject: Re: How much should a starship cost<BR>
<BR>
At 10:33 PM 12/21/99 PST, you wrote:<BR>
>In mail you write:<BR>
><BR>
>I rather expect that a "tramp freighter" is worth considerably than<BR>
>you'd think (and I'm talking about the current sea-going type). So<BR>
>perhaps we need to reconsider our overly romantic view of tramp<BR>
>freighters. <BR>
><BR>
<BR>
How many of the tramp freighters over the past fifty years have been<BR>
surplus Liberty ships? Nothing like a cheap, mass-produced ship class to<BR>
drive the price until they start falling apart.  <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>
<BR>
<BR>
Richard Wilson<BR>
<BR>
rtwilson@rollanet.org<BR>
<BR>
========================================================================<BR>
Humanity is not something we should aspire to. It is something we should<BR>
strive to overcome.<BR>
========================================================================<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 17:08:42 -0900<BR>
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@gci.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Freedom <BR>
<BR>
Ian Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca> wrote<BR>
<BR>
>         Yes, we live in a free society: both rich and poor people are<BR>
>         allowed to own a yacht, though neither rich nor poor people<BR>
>         may sleep in an ally.<BR>
<BR>
Or as Anatole France put it:<BR>
<BR>
"The law, in it's magnificent equality, forbids<BR>
the rich as well as the poor from sleeping<BR>
under bridges."<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 18:14:49 -0800<BR>
From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: Re: The Death of Q<BR>
<BR>
>ISTR hearing they're actually going to refer to the replacement character as<BR>
>R.<BR>
Doesn't it strike anyone as faintly suspicious that they had the replacement<BR>
character ready to go *before* Desmond's death?  I smell the Templars.<BR>
<BR>
Bruce<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 17:14:01 -0900<BR>
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@gci.net><BR>
Subject: Re: England<BR>
<BR>
Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com> wrote<BR>
<BR>
> >From: "Mark Preston" <mark@mpreston.demon.co.uk><BR>
> >Actually - and this may come as a suprise to <BR>
> >Americans - Britain does not have a bill of rights, <BR>
> >or even a written constitution. <BR>
<BR>
> This is no surprise at all to Americans.  Why do you<BR>
> think we kicked your king and soldiers out of here two<BR>
> hundred some years ago?  Why did we establish a<BR>
> republic and not a new monarchy? <BR>
<BR>
The reason the US established a republic and<BR>
not a monarchy is that George Washington said<BR>
no, or more accurately "NO!!",  when they asked <BR>
him to be the King of America. <BR>
<BR>
So then when they wrote the office of President<BR>
us _everyone_ at the Constitutional Convention<BR>
knew that Washington was going to be the first <BR>
President (and would stay President as long as he<BR>
felt like running for re-election, no term limits back<BR>
then). It is fairly clear if you read the notes of the<BR>
delegates to the convention that when they wrote up the<BR>
Presidency they all knew who it was going to be.<BR>
The President is the Commander in Chief of the armed<BR>
forces in the US, not merely because someone has to be,<BR>
but because the office was written up for General<BR>
George Washington.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 18:23:28 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: In Jokes<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> On 22 Dec 99, at 15:05, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
><BR>
>> Anyway, if you try, you'll probably *know* when you get it right<BR>
>> because all of a sudden it's *easier* to move than in any other posture<BR>
>> except our "normal" one. <BR>
><BR>
> It's also quite a quiet way to move, as long as you dan't stand on dry <BR>
> twigs, of course (or anything sharp).<BR>
<BR>
And due to the bent knees, you are about 6 inches shorter, thus<BR>
presenting a lower profile.<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: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 18:14:08 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Freedom<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Anthony Jackson writes:<BR>
>>Within _any_ legal system you are free to take any action that<BR>
>>does not violate the law (i.e. you may take any 'legal' action).<BR>
>>That's just a matter of definition.  Of course, the available<BR>
>>legal actions can be very limited.  What determines which of two<BR>
>>societies is 'freer' is what actions are legal.<BR>
<BR>
I suggest that you read the constitution of the lat USSR. You'll find<BR>
that it and the laws derived from it support freedom of speech, freedom<BR>
of the press, etc, and generally read like a *better* deal than y\the<BR>
US consitution.<BR>
<BR>
The trick is that the goverment freely punished actions that were quite<BR>
*legal*. <BR>
<BR>
Anybody making the mistake of thinking that "legal" means "you can do<BR>
it and not get in trouble with the government" is in for a *big* shock<BR>
in many places/times.<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: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 02:34:42 -0000<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nickb@ndirect.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: England<BR>
<BR>
>The last successful invasion of Britain was the German invasion of the<BR>
Channel<BR>
>Islands in 1940, which they held for the rest of WWII. England as a whole<BR>
has<BR>
>not been conquered by a foreign power since 1066 (William of Orange<BR>
>notwithstanding), nor have any of the subsequent British Unions involving<BR>
>England.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
That's not an invasion of Britain. That's an invasion of a very small part<BR>
of the country. (Annexation? I never was much good in history...)<BR>
<BR>
NB<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 22:41:34 -0400<BR>
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: 3 words, and Homeworld (was Re: Travshorts IV)<BR>
<BR>
At 11:39 AM 12/22/99 -0600, you wrote:<BR>
><BR>
>Also, how do you envision gunnery stations? A simple mouse-click interface<BR>
>or the equivalent (click click click! Those Vargr raiders are coming in too<BR>
>fast!) or a more hands-on joystick model (ooh, gotta adjust for windage!!!).<BR>
><BR>
>Ciao,<BR>
><BR>
>Joseph R. Dietrich<BR>
>yikes@evansville.net<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
        Well, in my TNEC milieu its all touch-screens, ICONS and<BR>
XWindows....  from a short story I *cannot* seem to finish:  "The computer<BR>
chirped at him, suddenly displaying a whirlpool icon on the long-range<BR>
screen. He looked at it, almost incredulously for a moment. He tapped the<BR>
icon, and then tapped the "CLASSIFY" option on the menu that appeared. A<BR>
window opened, and filled with information. He skimmed it, blinked, and<BR>
tapped through the sequence of pop-up menus on the own-ship status screen:<BR>
"ALERT STATUS- CHANGE- CONDITION AMBER- ALARM"...." <BR>
<BR>
        Gunnery in TNEC (in millieu-modern ships, anyway), is the same<BR>
thing....  the gunners are in an Ops room, they tap the contact, change<BR>
status to hostile from the drop down menu, pick the own ship menu, select<BR>
the weapon and fire-plan, and designate the target with a tap on the<BR>
screen...  the computer plots the solution and requests confirmation of fire<BR>
authorization, and then procedes to beat the tar out of the target until the<BR>
gunner tells it to stop or the target disappears from sensors.<BR>
<BR>
        --Michel<BR>
        (the TNEC guy)<BR>
<BR>
	-+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-<BR>
	Michel R. Vaillancourt	misha@atlantic-online.ns.ca<BR>
				ICQ # 31172292<BR>
	-+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-<BR>
	    NET-City Communications....<BR>
	         Providing "Solutions for the Common Company"<BR>
	-+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-<BR>
	***REMEMBER - Always virus-check your emails ***<BR>
	-+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 21:49:14 -0500<BR>
From: Thad Coons <Sapience@compuserve.com><BR>
Subject: Change of Command<BR>
<BR>
I recently read Elizabeth Moon's "Change of Command", and it has<BR>
several ideas that make good plots for Traveller.<BR>
<BR>
1) Interaction among noble families and corporations. It has<BR>
noble families and factions plotting against one another, some<BR>
for their own benefit, others for the percieved benefit to the<BR>
society, and using their control of corporations to gain<BR>
advantage to the family.<BR>
2) Naval fleet politics: changes in status of naval officers<BR>
depending on their connections with the corporations and<BR>
families, mingled with real military threats to security.<BR>
3) High tech colonies with insufficient support, trying to<BR>
survive and adapt without technology and technicians.<BR>
<BR>
In fact, there are excellent Traveller ideas to be mined from all<BR>
her works set in Familias space.<BR>
  <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 21:49:11 -0500<BR>
From: Thad Coons <Sapience@compuserve.com><BR>
Subject: USIP<BR>
<BR>
With the various kinds of societies, it is difficult to know how<BR>
societies will interact with one another or respond to social<BR>
pressures. As a guide to predicting how societies or NPC groups<BR>
of any kind are likely to behave in social situations, I would<BR>
like to suggest a Universal Social Interaction Profile (USIP).<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
This has seven independent characteristics, with the distribution<BR>
of possibilities following the same 2d6 as the UPP in most<BR>
versions of Traveller.<BR>
<BR>
1) Cohesiveness<BR>
2) Tolerance<BR>
3) Flexibility<BR>
4) Hedonism<BR>
5) Generosity<BR>
6) Honor<BR>
7) Violence<BR>
<BR>
Cohesiveness.<BR>
This and individuality might be considered opposites. An extreme<BR>
low cohesion score indicates that all individuals are solitary. <BR>
If groups do form, they are of short duration. A high cohesion<BR>
indicates the tendency to form groups to the extent that<BR>
individuals mean nothing to the group.<BR>
<BR>
Alien tolerance<BR>
This has to do with how much physical or mental differences are<BR>
important to the society. A society with low alien tolerance is<BR>
xenophobic: Even trivial differences assume great significance. A<BR>
society with high alien tolerance will, for example, treat all<BR>
sentient beings as equals, without regard to appearance and<BR>
little regard to behavior. There are no "us-them" distinctions.  <BR>
<BR>
Flexibility<BR>
This has to do with how well new ideas and behaviors are accepted<BR>
by the group. A very low flexibility is rigid and unchanging,<BR>
often with a strong caste or hierarchical structure. A highly<BR>
flexible society is so highly tolerant of change that social<BR>
structure is temporary and transient, and fads and fashions are<BR>
common.<BR>
<BR>
Hedonism<BR>
This has to do with the pursuit of pleasure. A society with<BR>
extreme low hedonism tends to be ascetic and self-denying, and<BR>
endurance or acceptance of pain and suffering. A society with<BR>
extreme high hedonism tends to seek pleasure, both physical and<BR>
mental, as the highest good.<BR>
<BR>
Generosity<BR>
This has to do with material acquisitiveness. A society with<BR>
extreme low generosity is miserly and greedy: If possible, the<BR>
society will take anything they can and give nothing. A society<BR>
with high generosity is so openhanded that they will give<BR>
anything to anyone on request. A society with average generosity<BR>
will have equal or fair exchange as a value.<BR>
<BR>
Honor<BR>
This has to do with trustworthiness. A society with low honor<BR>
cannot be trusted, either to tell the truth or keep any promises<BR>
that are made. A society with high honor will never decieve or<BR>
mislead, and will regard promises as inviolable. A society with<BR>
average honor will be mostly relable, but with frequent lapses.<BR>
This includes also the degree of voluntary compliance with laws.<BR>
<BR>
Violence<BR>
This has to do with willingness to use physical violence to<BR>
accomplish the society's ends. A society with low violence is<BR>
completely pacifistic: one with high violence sees nothing wrong<BR>
with killing at the slightest provocation. A society with average<BR>
violence tends toward tit-for-tat behavior most of the time.<BR>
<BR>
Some examples:<BR>
<BR>
5B64A54<BR>
This society tends to be fragmented, but so exceptionally tolerant<BR>
of differences that it is one of the prime virtues of the<BR>
society. Groups are more likely to split into factions that<BR>
respect each other's differences than to enforce conformity. This<BR>
is a somewhat difficult, painful process, since flexibility is on<BR>
the low side. The society leans heavily toward the ascetic and<BR>
self-denying. People are exceptionally generous and openhanded: You may<BR>
not like your neigbhor, but you won't let him starve. Theft is<BR>
quite low, but there is a strong reliance on polite lies and<BR>
fictions to smooth over social differences. Overall, there is a<BR>
tendency for polite, highly complex social games, with high<BR>
esteem expressed for "respected colleagues". These more often<BR>
result in division and rearrangment of social factions that in<BR>
violence, but it is not unknown.<BR>
<BR>
8467758<BR>
This society is fairly cohesive, with unity stressed slightly<BR>
over individualism. There is a marked tendency to an us-versus-<BR>
them mentality, so social conflicts tend to become polarized.<BR>
Flexibility is on the low side: so adjustments are somewhat<BR>
difficult, but not unreasonably so. Hedonism is about average for<BR>
human society: some but not excessive pleasure seeking is<BR>
encouraged. Generosity is about human average, and the ideal is<BR>
an emphasis on fair trade; but practice is about balanced between<BR>
generous giving and theft or fraud. Honor is on the low side: In<BR>
this society, it manifests itself in a tendency to make treaties<BR>
and contracts and then disregard them. There is some tendency for<BR>
disputes to be resolved violently, but the cohesive, structured,<BR>
polarized tendencies of society mean that it is more organized,<BR>
large-scale warfare; more gang than individual, although smaller<BR>
scale violence is not unknown.<BR>
<BR>
My Impressions of the "normal" or average for societies in the<BR>
major races would be:<BR>
Human     7777777<BR>
Vargr     5797777<BR>
Aslan     8656699<BR>
K'kree    A537779<BR>
Hiver     7996763<BR>
  <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 21:49:18 -0500<BR>
From: Thad Coons <Sapience@compuserve.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Mars Exploration<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 17:41:31 -0800 (PST)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Mars Exploration<BR>
<BR>
>However, the startup costs were dramatically lower (which _does_<BR>
>matter).  Note that I never said that commercialized space<BR>
>travel was impossible, just that it isn't particularly<BR>
>surprising that no company has decided to throw money at the<BR>
>problem.<BR>
<BR>
Agreed, startup costs are substantially higher than the Wright<BR>
Brothers, but that doesn't account for all the pessimism about<BR>
the probable Return on Investment.<BR>
<BR>
>This problem is endemic in the space industry; the <BR>
>shuttle was _supposed_ to be exactly what you describe, it just<BR>
>turned out that the technology of the time was not up to the<BR>
>task of building a fully reusable SSTO.<BR>
<BR>
A vehicle the size of the shuttle was too much of a technological<BR>
leap. If NASA had been able to start a reusable vehicle program<BR>
with something the scale of the Mercury program 25 years ago,<BR>
something the size of the shuttle might be practical by now. As<BR>
it is, NASA is married to a troll. Besides, although SSTO is an<BR>
elegant idea, I'd back a 2-stage or variant that is fully<BR>
reusable over an SSTO that isn't.<BR>
<BR>
>My basic argument here is that you seem to believe that cheap<BR>
>space travel is easy, with just a little bit of research, and<BR>
>that if corporations/nasa/ whatever would just recognize this,<BR>
>the problem would be solved.  <BR>
<BR>
The handful of companies out of a couple of dozen wannabes<BR>
(besides the ones partnering with NASA on the X-33, X-34, etc.)<BR>
that have managed to scrape up partial financing and do some<BR>
testing are talking $100 million or less and two or three years<BR>
for a suborbital prototype.  But if they don't get enough money<BR>
to to build their vehicles and try them out, no one will ever<BR>
know whether they would have worked or not.  As it is, the<BR>
engineering is reportedly easy compared to the financing.<BR>
  <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 21:51:54 -0500 (EST)<BR>
From: Kenji Schwarz <schwarz@fas.harvard.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: [OT] War of 1812<BR>
<BR>
On Wed, 22 Dec 1999, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> The US *is* big. But Russia is *huge*. The main part of the US is 4<BR>
> time zones across. Russia is *nine*. Maybe more, I'd have to check. <BR>
<BR>
Eleven, I'm pretty sure.<BR>
<BR>
Kenji<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 02:58:57 -0000<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nickb@ndirect.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: The Death of Q<BR>
<BR>
>>ISTR hearing they're actually going to refer to the replacement character<BR>
as<BR>
>>R.<BR>
>Doesn't it strike anyone as faintly suspicious that they had the<BR>
replacement<BR>
>character ready to go *before* Desmond's death?  I smell the Templars.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Desmond had planned to retire anyway after TWINE. The John Cleese character<BR>
was to replace him in his retirement.<BR>
<BR>
Nick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 22:57:31 -0400<BR>
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: OT: ToP-123<BR>
<BR>
At 06:08 PM 12/22/99 -0500, you wrote:<BR>
        [snip]<BR>
>_remake_ of "The Taking of Pelham 123" - was shot in Toronto's<BR>
        [snip]<BR>
<BR>
>Trust me, the original (with Walter Matthau) was far better, and<BR>
>far more authentic.<BR>
>--<BR>
>Jeff Zeitlin<BR>
<BR>
        I really enjoyed that movie...  Matthau did a great job.<BR>
<BR>
        --Michel<BR>
<BR>
	-+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-<BR>
	Michel R. Vaillancourt	misha@atlantic-online.ns.ca<BR>
				ICQ # 31172292<BR>
	-+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-<BR>
	    NET-City Communications....<BR>
	         Providing "Solutions for the Common Company"<BR>
	-+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-<BR>
	***REMEMBER - Always virus-check your emails ***<BR>
	-+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 22:59:47 -0400<BR>
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: In Jokes<BR>
<BR>
At 05:12 PM 12/22/99 -0600, you wrote:<BR>
>On 12/22/99 at 05:45 AM,  shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) said:<BR>
><BR>
>>Not to second guess you or anything, but let me get this straight. Two<BR>
>>characters in *BD* encountered each other in an *engineering access<BR>
>>crawlspace*? And one of them fired an FGMP *several* times?<BR>
><BR>
>An FGMP does 12d6, right? <g><BR>
><BR>
>Eris<BR>
<BR>
        The first time myself and my friends read the _Mercenary_ rules, we<BR>
looked at the FGMP-15 and said "12d6 CUBED?  OMIGOD...  we're not using<BR>
these, RIGHT?"  We were reading the superscipt notifier for the foot note as<BR>
a power....  <grin><BR>
<BR>
        --Michel<BR>
	-+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-<BR>
	Michel R. Vaillancourt	misha@atlantic-online.ns.ca<BR>
				ICQ # 31172292<BR>
	-+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-<BR>
	    NET-City Communications....<BR>
	         Providing "Solutions for the Common Company"<BR>
	-+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-<BR>
	***REMEMBER - Always virus-check your emails ***<BR>
	-+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 18:44:08 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: United States<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>> That was the *height* of the Assyrian Empire IIRC.<BR>
><BR>
> The Assyrian records don't start until 893BC.<BR>
<BR>
How about Sumeria?<BR>
<BR>
>> The Minoan Empire is a possibilty, but I think the eruption of Thera<BR>
>> wiped them out centuries earlier.<BR>
><BR>
> The Minoans were hit by earthquakes and tsunamis about 1400BC, but <BR>
> survived. However the Mycenaens invaded (probably in the aftermath of <BR>
> the 'quakes) and took over until they dissappeared around 1200BC. <BR>
> However the Minoans date from at least 3100 BC, in their earliest form <BR>
> (so do the Mycenean greeks), and were probably at their height from <BR>
> about 1600BC to 1450BC. The interesting thing about the Minoans is that <BR>
> they had no inland fortifications (we don't know about their coastal <BR>
> areas, as the tsunamis didn't leave much) despite having the very <BR>
> warlike Myceneans as neighbours. It would appear that they were the <BR>
> first naval power in the world.<BR>
>  <BR>
>> The Phoenicians might be around. <BR>
><BR>
> The Phoenicians date from the greek dark ages and onwards (as <BR>
> independants, otherwise they were active about 1500BC). Say 1200BC<BR>
><BR>
> For 1650 BC we have (a rough list):<BR>
><BR>
> Egyptians<BR>
> Minoans<BR>
> Myceneans<BR>
> Troy (I don't know which number)<BR>
> China<BR>
> The Hebrews (they entered Egypt around this time)<BR>
> The final work at Stonehenge was done around now<BR>
> I think the Hittites were around as well.<BR>
><BR>
> Obviously there are more, but I don't know their names.<BR>
<BR>
This points out a "need" fort SF/Fantasy writers. A "timeline" giving<BR>
prominent cultures at various times for the whole world.<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: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 18:31:53 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: [OT] War of 1812<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> I have been known to.  Very often if they do get them,<BR>
> they serve as important clues.  I have had groups chase<BR>
> after the elusive Crimson Clupeidae or the Scarlet<BR>
> AleWife for months, even years (of game time).<BR>
<BR>
I'm the suspicious type. I'd look either of those up as soon as I got<BR>
the chance. <BR>
<BR>
BTW, one of the *prime* rules for new GMs. <BR>
<BR>
If the players jump to a conclusion, or assume something as fact that<BR>
*wasn't* part of what you've told them, *DON'T* correct them!<BR>
<BR>
Not only do they deserve the chance to learn not to make such mistakes,<BR>
but watching them in the process can be highly amusing. :-)<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: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 23:04:25 -0400<BR>
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: Vargr, Just for Kicks (was Re: In Jokes)<BR>
<BR>
At 03:05 PM 12/22/99 PST, you wrote:<BR>
>In mail you write:<BR>
><BR>
>>> > (several exchanges later, Sid's Vargr kicks the marine to death, while<BR>
>><BR>
>> Hmmmm... correct me if I am wrong here, but I have always thought <BR>
>> Vargr physiology makes their kicks pretty ineffective, right? I seem <BR>
>> to remember the rule of thumb... "Vargr can't kick." <shrug>.<BR>
><BR>
>Forwards? I tend to agree. But *backwards* is a whole different story.<BR>
>Being digigrade[1], rather than plantigrade[2], Vargr are likely to be<BR>
>able to kick well *behind* themselves, and also do *nasty* "belly<BR>
>rakes" to someone they've grappled with.<BR>
><BR>
>Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
<BR>
        Hi, Leonard!<BR>
<BR>
        I always presumed that any Vargr martial-art or unarmed combat<BR>
techniques would be delivered as a cross between Capeoria (leap - hand-stand<BR>
- - KICK - pivot - roll - KICK) and Hopkido (leap - grapple - pin - BREAK -<BR>
POUND - POUND - POUND....) depending what range the target was at when the<BR>
whole show started...<BR>
<BR>
        --Michel<BR>
        (who thinks Vargr are a cool concept race and get way miserable PR...)<BR>
<BR>
	-+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-<BR>
	Michel R. Vaillancourt	misha@atlantic-online.ns.ca<BR>
				ICQ # 31172292<BR>
	-+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-<BR>
	    NET-City Communications....<BR>
	         Providing "Solutions for the Common Company"<BR>
	-+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-<BR>
	***REMEMBER - Always virus-check your emails ***<BR>
	-+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #1558<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-yh05.mx.aol.com (rly-yh05.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.37]) by air-yh04.mail.aol.com (v67.7) with ESMTP; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 22:10:15 -0500<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yh05.mx.aol.com (v67.7) with ESMTP; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 22:09:53 -0500<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id WAA06481;<BR>
	Wed, 22 Dec 1999 22:08:57 -0500 (EST)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Wed, 22 Dec 1999 22:06:34 -0500<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id WAA06414<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 22:06:34 -0500 (EST)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 22:06:34 -0500 (EST)<BR>
Message-Id: <199912230306.WAA06414@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 #1558<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
