New Traveller )-8

I think the whole thing with this compatible system is so that people
who is well verse in one game can jump into another with ease.

For example, anyone who is well verse in Dark Conspiracy can learn to
play TW2000 just like that. If I have never play Traveller before,
and I know that the system is compatible with other GDW games which I
have had experience with, it'd be easier for me to learn the game.
And since I'm usually lazy, that would prove to be an adavantage for me.

Also, I think it would incrase the usefulness of GDW supplements.
If the rules are compatible, I can use say TW2000's Infantry weapons
of the world if I so desire without much work on my part. Making the
rules compatible isn't just for running cross over campaigns.

				Mac, who has no idea why he's up at 4AM!

Wilson MacGyver                      | Everytime you have an idea, I get
Internet:[email removed] | grounded for a week!
=====================================| 			- Gloria
Disclaimer:All opinions are mine only|=======================================

> From: "Robert S. Dean" [email removed]
> Subject: (2909)  New Traveller )-8
>
> My question is: What advantages does anyone see in going to a compatible
> game system?  Is there really any interest in running Traveller/Dark
> Conspiracy crossovers?

  "Who needs elves when we got Darrians?" :)

> A well done Traveller game should already include
> 90% of the information needed to run a Traveller/Twilight:2000 crossover.

  Since the timelines are different, ie T2k (and 2300??) has a limited nuclear
war and no Vilani on Barnard and MegaT has no nuke war but lots of Vilani at
Barnard, I don't actually see the possibilities of a crossover, unless we are
talking about some other planet than Earth. And even then it could be done
with the origianl rules.
  (Gashikan after the Sack of Gashikan, for example)

  'Dark' is even further from MegaT than T2k and I'd go so far as to say that
I cannot see the justification of a crossover without some major verbal
acrobatics.

  "Whaddyamean 'Both Strephons were false'??!!"

> Rob Dean

- -bertil-
- --
'Det a"r oo"versa"ttbart...'

[surely doeth it hurt when charters break:)]

> From: "Robert S. Dean" [email removed]
> Subject: (2909)  New Traveller )-8
>
> Are we going to be happy to be using a system where
> an average character can take two average damage .50 caliber machine gun
> bullets to the head without becoming unconscious?

  (originally a part of my other reply, but I had to check some figures)

  I agree that people can stand too much damage in T2k, but two .50cal is an
exaggeration. If we take the Joe A Average (A is for Above:) with 6 in all
stats (1-10 is the range) he will be slightly damaged at <=12 hits in the
head, seriously damaged at <=24 hits and dead at 25 and up.
  A .50cal does 8D of damage, average of 3.5 per die gives 28, wich means that
he has more than 50% chance of being dead. And there is a 100% chance of he
being unconcious.

  If we include the quick kill rule we will get something like the following
figures on the risk of dying or getting unconcious from one hit on a random
part of the body:

  d6 of damage	%dead	%unconcious	weapon
	1	2%	5%		7mm revolvers and autos
	2	4%	12%		9mm autos & smg's
	3	6%	12%		5.56N
	4	8%	12%		7.62
	6	12%	34%		some elephant guns
	8	17%	50%		.50cal (shotgun at close does 9D)
	10	19%	55%		some bloc HMG (?)

  On the other hand, if we make the simple modification of halving the damage
to each hit location that characters can stand*, and apply this on
Joe A Average II we will get this:

  d6 of damage	%dead	%unconcious	weapon
	1	2%	5%		7mm revolvers and autos
	2	4%	12%		9mm autos & smg's
	3	8%	31%		5.56N
	4	11%	52%		7.62
	6	15%	75%		some elephant guns
	8	18%	81%		.50cal (shotgun at close does 9D)
	10	19%	90%		some bloc HMG (?)

  * I agree, it is a patch, but compared to some of the patches for
MegaTraveller it is small and non-intrusive, and it is only used once: on
character generation.

> Rob Dean

- -bertil-
- --
'Det a"r oo"versa"ttbart...'