Traveller Revision

A thread of 2 messages, 20 September 1991 to 21 September 1991, in the order they were sent.

#2878 Traveller Revision

[unnamed sender] · 20 September 1991

Well Yet Another Traveller Revision.....

While I will be the first to jump out and say that GDW needs to get its
act together vis a vis MT or Traveller. I am annoyed at their "universe
tinkering". The rules badly need revision ( and proof reading) but this
rumored change will leave nothing of the old Traveller behind.

And what about us die hard Travellers do we have to shell out another
30-40 for a new update which will be revised in another 6 mths. Do we
get a refund for Ships of the Shattered Imperium or the old rule books,
kind of like a trade in.

I have a nagging suspicion that GDW's promises of a clean product will be
unkept.

My 2 credits.

Ameer Sulaiman.

P.S. I can't seem to get e-mail through to Rob Dean. Could u please send me
your address again. Apparently u have no problem getting to me....

#2879 Re: (2878) Traveller Revision

MacGyver · 21 September 1991 · reply to #2878

> And what about us die hard Travellers do we have to shell out another
> 30-40 for a new update which will be revised in another 6 mths. Do we
> get a refund for Ships of the Shattered Imperium or the old rule books,
> kind of like a trade in.
>
> I have a nagging suspicion that GDW's promises of a clean product will be
> unkept.

	Well, I have my suspicion too. But GDW has really improved
from what I have seen, juding by the year of 91. GDW's rule used to
be ill proof-read, ill play-tested. MT is a good example, the first edition
of TW2000 is another good example. Not to mention stuff like the MT
sharship of SI.

	But their recent products have imporved quite a bit. If the proof
read level is anything like TW2000 the 2nd edition, or Dark Conspiracy,
I'd been very happy.

	BTW, the revision is not due till the end of 92, which is more
than a year away.