Submission

A thread of 2 messages, 17 March 1994 to 20 March 1994, in the order they were sent.

#6985 Submission

Quote:

Gentlesophonts:

Are there any folks out there who are more interested in campaign
background rather than rules and such?  TML discussions of late seem to
be overwhelmed with questions and debates over what are, IMHO, minutia.

Is there anyone else who thinks
discussions about weapon penetration, craft design, and planetary
science is a little moot in a two-dimensional universe?

Endquote.

    YES! While I loved CT's rules, and find T:TNE workable, it's the
background that's drawn me over the years. I guess I just get lost in hi-tech
discussions of the physics of systems that defy the laws of physics as we
know them. Most of the time, they really don't even affect the game that
much.
    For my 2 crs worth, I loved CT's background, but never really saw why the
Imperium's grasp on its world was so tenuous as to allow for interstellar
mini-wars. I think the new setting works much better as an area for
adventurer exploration....though I'd love to see more info from the Spinward
Marches. Call me a romantic, but I miss the old Empire. I still think of the
Zhodani as the ultimate enemy.
    And while I can accept two-dimensionality on the Imperial maps, 2-D
Brilliant Lances seems rather more silly at times.

#7014 Re: Submission

[email removed] writes:

>     And while I can accept two-dimensionality on the Imperial maps, 2-D
> Brilliant Lances seems rather more silly at times.

	One of the first things I noticed in Brilliant Lances (I haven't
actually played a game yet) was that it could trivially be adapted
to a 3-D system, just as soon as you could devise a method of displaying
the map.  Everything in the rules would translate easily, and very
little would actually have to be translated.

	Chris Bertani			[email removed]