Greetings to TML'ers.
====================
GENERAL RAMBLINGS
=================
I have been lurking and listening for a while, and so thought it was
about time I sent in some comments.
Wildstar:
My Traveller campaign is currently at 317/1107, so I think I have
a way to go before hitting the Rebellion - allowing for no changes in
History along the way, of course 8-). So, I wouldn't mind seeing your old
Classic Traveller stuff either. If you don't want to post it again to
TML I would appreciate you email me at the following INTERNET address:
[email removed]
...thanks in advance. Let me know if there is any I can do for you in
return.
Metlay & James Perkins:
I like your comments regarding courtesy. Well said.
Dale Poole says:
>What the hell is COACC?
COACC stands for: Close Orbit and Aerospace Control Command, I believe.
Hope it helps.
TO GDW:
=======
RE: 'THE NEW ERA' (TNE)
- -----------------------
I am looking forward to TNE to see what you come up with. With this in
mind I have provided a list of some things I would like to see in the
game.
TNE WISH LIST
=============
RE: DESIGN RULES
- ----------------
If I buy the TNE rules + TNE Imperium sourcebook combination I would
like to be able to start play as soon as possible. Having to stop to
design starships, ground vehicles etc is the last thing I want to do.
I would prefer to see a longer list of equipment, including vehicles for
Air, Sea, Land, Space, and Interstellar Travel, rather than a long set of
detailed design rules. In my own roleplaying the design rules have not
featured in the games I have run, and very little in any games I have
played in. Thus they would be of little use to me initially, whereas a
good list of equipment is always of use.
From what I have seen of Twilight 2000, Merc 2000, and Dark Conspiracy
they have very well presented equipment sections. They also have good
building plans, which I find to be of great use too. I hope TNE emulates
this approach.
Rather than full detailed design rules on how to start from scratch,
rules on options for varying the standard designs might be a better way
to go in the basic rules. This would allow even more vehicles to be
easily constructed from the standards presented.
Design rules _have_ featured in Trillion Credit style play by mail cam-
paigns which I have played in, so I wouldn't mind seeing some design rules
eventually, or released at the same time but in a self contained volume.
If these design rules for vehicles, robots etc were _all_ together, tested
and workable, this would save hunting through basic rules, supplements etc
whenever you wanted to design something, or check something in the design
rules. Another advantage of this approach is that you would have room to
go into the detail that some people appreciate, in a separate volume that
only these people need buy.
It would be nice if the design rules were easily tunable too - so you
can have a campaign where ordinary individuals can own a starship
because they cost 1/10 or 1/20 say of standard Traveller's pricing.
RE:ECONOMICS
- ------------
It would be nice if you could include some ideas on how economics is sup-
posed to work too, as background to the trade rules. I am not asking for
a treatise on economics - just some guidelines to help when trading comes
up in a game.
RE: DIFFERENT METHODS FOR SPACE/INTERSTELLAR TRAVEL
- ---------------------------------------------------
I have no objection to this - I would *like* to see some variety. Jump,
Gate, and [Stutter]Warp systems seem as good a start as any. Advice
on tuning them would be useful too - then beginning refs can construct
a universe which more faithfully models their intention or favourite
sci fi novel.
RE:STUTTERWARP & SHIP COMBAT
- ----------------------------
I don't think 2300's stutterwarp as is will work in the Imperium back-
ground. I like the game mechanics though - you could present this as
an alternative to using a delta-vee system for ship maneuvre and combat.
You could tone down the stutterwarp efficiency so that it becomes closer
to jump drive in performance - perhaps only better in certain circum-
stances. In this way you could have a Traveller version of stutterwarp
which works for Traveller.
COACC's approach for aerial dogfights is also good - they provide an
abstract system, which I use, and a more detailed system to resolve as
a board game, which I don't - though I would like to try it some time.
I think this is a good approach. You serve the needs of those who like a
board game style of resolution, and those who don't. Two different
abstract systems, or two different board game systems, would not be as
good in my opinion.
Both these approaches are better for -roleplaying- ship to ship combats
than High Guard - at least in my humble opinion.
RE: WORLD BOOKS, LIKE GURPS, FOR DIFFERENT SETTINGS.
- ----------------------------------------------------
I like the idea of a 2300 world book for this system. One of the groups
I play with likes the 2300 setting _a lot_, and dislike the 2300 rules
(not STARCRUISER...they love this too) equally as emphatically. I am
currently using CYBERPUNK 2020 as the rules to run a 2300 game (minus the
CYBERPUNK aspects presented in the EARTH/CYBERTECH source book), and people
find it a good fit - nice simple mechanics that they understand, and a
_much_ more pleasant universe.
Since we haven't gotten very far yet they might be interested in helping
playtest TNE rules for a 2300 setting. (unsubtle hint)... 8-)
LASTLY (phew I hear you say 8-)
- -------------------------------
I have recently had an opportunity to look through the rules for STAR
WARS RPG. I like their approach of having rules for trade, ship combat,
world design etc biased toward either being easy to ROLEPLAY with, or
provide opportunities for roleplaying. This is what I would like to see
with TNE. I think it is what the original Traveller had, despite its
warts, that Megatraveller doesn't.
- --
Alistair Langsford,
Canberra Australia.
INTERNET: [email removed]
Highlander II: The Sickening - there should only have been one!
(quoted from Interface Magazine)