Does anyone know what the reasoning behind the minimum hull size is? I've been using a 90 DT scout ship as the main scout ship for my pocket empire so if there is a reason behind this, I'd be very interested in it. (I do know I don't *have to* follow the rule, but the reasoning behind it will help me figure out if I *want to* or not.)
Sent on the TELUS Mobility network with BlackBerry
-----Original Message-----
From: "far_trader_mail"
Date: Thu, 20 May 2010 14:22:09
Subject: [Traveller_TNE] TNE FF&S Errata (was Re: Ore Processor and two quick questions)
--- In , "donm61873" <don.mckinney@...> wrote:
>
> I know that Marc (Miller) has confirmed that the 100-ton minimum ship size is definitely errata for TNE, and your suggestion of 28m3 makes a great deal of sense related to that. Do you have a recommendation for where this errata should be placed?
>
FF&S Chapter 3: Page 42: "Jump Drives... Important Note: The smallest jump drive possible, at any tech level, is 28m3. The smallest hull that can support jump drive, at any tech level, is 1400m3."
I would also add a note in Chapter 1. Something to the effect...
FF&S Chapter 1: Page 10: "Designing Spacecraft... 1. Hulls... The first step in designing a space craft is deciding if it is a Starship or Spaceship. Starships are special cases that use a jump drive for interstellar travel and must be a minimum of 1400m3. Alternative interstellar drives do not require this minimum hull size. The next step is to determine the size, shape, and... "
(at least I'm not aware of size restrictions for alternative drive tech, though there may well be, I'm just not familiar with them and their original rule systems, like Stutterwarp)
Dan "far-trader" Burns
> --- In , "far_trader_mail" <far_trader_mail@> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In , "roger" <rogerclarktopaz@> wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm curious is there a minimum size that starships can be built? In FFS-1 page 42 it states that the smallest a jump drive can be made is 2m3.
> >
> > I've long believed that was a typo/errata and should have read 28m3. The error being they either dropped the "8" in entering the value, or took the 2ton minimum from HG et al and forgot to change the value when changing the units to fit FF&S1. So it's not 2m3 but 2tons, or more properly 28m3. No big deal, they screwed up the text, not the long held standard minimum drive size, nor the 100dton minimum ship size.
> >
> > --- In , DED <dedly@> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Before TNE, 100 tons was the minimum size. TNE said that starships could
> > > have displacements less than 100 tons.
> >
> > Where? Precisely. I don't recall TNE stating that starships could be less than 100dtons. I do recall some designs being created after the fact, based on what I believe was an error, the 2m3 (imo) errata idiocy above. I saw that on my very first read of the rules when first published and was sure it was a mistake, but I don't recall anywhere the rules saying starships can be less than 100tons displacement. If I had then I wouldn't have felt it was a mistake. Maybe I've missed that all these years. If so I'd stand corrected on it being errata, it would simply be (imo) idiocy of the first order then ;-)
> >
> > Dan "far-trader" Burns
> >
>