Re: Star Wars in Trav

Robert S. Dean  [email removed] writes:
> Adrian Hurt [email removed] writes:
> > [email removed] (Stephen Camp) writes:
> > > What's the Traveller equivalent of a Star Wars Blaster?
> > > ...
> >
> > It fires a bolt which glows, which explodes when it hits something, and
> > which you can see moving. I'd guess that makes it a plasma weapon of some
> > sort.
>
> Recreating Star Wars using Traveller is a matter of making a number of
> decisions regarding translation.  My inclination would be to treat the
> Star Wars blaster as a laser pistol, and the Force as straight psionics.

I'd agree about the Force/psionics - in fact, didn't one of the old Traveller
supplements have a UPP and description for Darth Vader?  Maybe you could put
the visible, exploding bolts which move as you watch them down to artistic
license or Hollywood ignorance. :-)

> It's the light saber that is hard to translate, since I can't come up
> with a good explanation for it that doesn't involve force field tech
> that Traveller doesn't have.

Once you've got proper deflector shields, my guess is that a light sabre is
just a high power laser plus a deflector shield to restrict the beam.  Of
course, someone is going to have to make some major advances in power
technology in order to have a laser that powerful with a power cell that is
held in the hand, rather than worn on the back.

> > Try building an X-wing using MT rules, complete with hyperspace/jump drives,
> > and 4 lasers plus a power plant which can drive them and its manouevre drive
> > at the same time.  Don't forget the deflector shields and the proton
> > torpedoes....
>
> If you really want me to, I will, (-:, but I was under the impression that
> fighters didn't have hyperspace drives.

Guess who hasn't seen "Return of the Jedi"? ;-)  Imperial fighters don't have
hyperspace drives, but Rebel fighters do.

>					  In any case, you could either do it
> as a 100 ton fighter, or adopt 2-G Scott's suggestion that you permit the
> minimum sized jump drive to be installed in any hull, limited only by
> volume.

The former option would make for a very large X-wing.  In Star Wars, "fighters"
means fighters, at most the size of present day fighters.  A 100 ton ship is
about the size of a decent airliner.

>	  Call the deflector shield a sandcaster, and the proton torpedo
> a nuclear missile, and you're all set. (-:

There are two problems with sandcasters.  (A) When an X-wing switches its
deflectors to the rear, you don't tend to see a big cloud of dust behind
it.  (You tend to see a big cloud of dust *instead* of it if the reason for
putting your deflector there is Darth Vader's TIE fighter. :-)  (B) Sand
does not stay with you when you turn, which makes it useless for fighters
which engage in the dogfighting seen in "Star Wars".

>								I don't
> think that anything really critical to the plot hinges on the mechanics of
> Star Wars universe, unlike something like Dune, say, where the use of the
> Guild Navigators and personal shields are both important to the plot and
> not terribly adaptable to Traveller.

Nothing especially critical to the plot, apart from light-sabres, dogfighting
fighters and weapons which can destroy entire planets with one shot. ;-)

- --
 "Keyboard?  How quaint!" - M. Scott

 Adrian Hurt			     |	JANET:  [email removed]
 UUCP: ..!uknet!cee.hw.ac.uk!adrian  |  ARPA:  [email removed]