Metlay:
>Many thanks to Steve Higginbotham for correcting the mistaken identity
>in his post. I could rebut his arguments in a number of areas, including
>a post of thermal output vs. neutron flux figures that prove that any
>fusion burst small enough not to do overwhelming neutron damage will
>carry a negligible thermal impact (i.e. fusion becomes deadly as a
>neutron source LONG before it can fry anything), but I'd prefer to
>stand on philosophical arguments this time around....
SO, what's the neutron flux from a 50 GW fusion plant? Can it be shielded
from with less than 2500 metric tons of shielding? If not, then kiss MT
fusion
plants goodbye, too.
>Of COURSE I'm showing my TL8 prejudices. I live in a TL8 society and
>Traveller is a TL8 roleplaying game. Any attempts to run it otherwise
>catapult us into the black hole foam within a very short time. I find
>it simpler to eject a device which is idiotic than to justify it if the
>game doesn't rely on it and it offends me. I'd love to see your arguments
>for why people should be running around with Light Sabres, too.
Why do you assume that if it can't be built now, then it can't be built
ever?
I find the fusion gun ridiculous for other reasons: it costs too much for
what it does. If a RAM grenade will do it for Cr20, why spend KCr300 to do
it? I do NOT believe that we (today, here on Terra) have learned all there
is to learn about the universe's workings, and I arbitrarily reject any
argument that assumes that what we know now is all there is.
People have objected to grav technology in MT for a variety of reasons,
almost
all coming down to a variation of "it doesn't agree with physics as we know
it".
Some people said that about Einstein's work, and some said it about quantum
physics later (Einstein, for one). SOme even said it about Newton's work.
I see no reason to believe that physics has now reached the pinnacle of
knowledge,
or that ANYTHING in science fiction is impossible. I will reserve
judgement
until it happens. I DO assume that if the picture presented is INTERNALLY
consistent that there is no reason to mess with it.
Notice that MT assumes that TL14+ technology can build a fusion plant of
100
liters (and 300Kg). It follows that they have methods of shielding against
neutrons that we don't. If we reject fusion guns as feasible in MT, then
we
should also reject fusion plants smaller than 1GW (I doubt we could build
one that light today), nuclear dampers, meson technology, superdense
materials,
jump drive, grav technology, maneuver drive (replace with chemical rockets
or
NERVA, which we know work, all else is guesswork), personal lasers, battle
dress (we can't make batteries that small), etc, etc. If you eliminate the
science fiction elements, why play a science fiction game? If you keep any
science fiction elements, why throw out things that are, at least,
internally
consistent?
I have found that all the MT (and Traveller) campaigns I have played in
have
managed to avoid paying attention to FGMPs and PGMPs by paying attention to
Law Levels. If the solution is that simple, why bother with anything else?
And if your PCs flout the law a lot, feel free to have the SWAT teams blow
them away till they get the hint.
And if you really can't stand FGMPs, drop them, but don't try to explain it
as "impossible". It probably isn't. (at MT prices, it probably isn't
WORTH doing, but it is probably possible to do,if one had a reason and 3000
years of prior research).
Later...
- -- Via DLG Pro v0.985b
[email removed]
I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution.
--W. von Braun