--- In , Eamon Watters <eamonwatters@...> wrote:
>
> How can it be errata for TNE? TNE specifically introduced a sub 100-ton jump-capable ship.
>
The authors of such were taking the book at its literal without knowledge of, or ignoring same, the way Traveller jump drives work. So such designs also need to be noted as errata.
I was certain when I read it (the 2m3 minimum size) when it was first published that it was errata. You'll note the TNE main book had no sub-100 ton Starships and the example in FF&S uses a 100ton ship. Pretty glaring oversights IF the rule had really meant to be changed that much don't you think? Of course I don't blame anyone not passing familiar with prior Traveller canon on jump drives for missing it. And even an editor can be forgiven for missing it. It's a typo.
Changing this would seriously change the whole nature of the default Traveller setting. Alternative tech may permit such, and I'd have no argument with such. But jump drives are the default tech, and they have to work the same way they always did before. In my opinion, and apparently Marc's as well which is good enough for me. If Marc has said it was an error, then it is. And all official designs (and effects) resulting from the error are likewise rendered illegitimate. Using one (or several) such published examples as proof it isn't an error is not logical since they are the result of the error. They and the consequences are at best part of a special sub-set of Alternate TU. An unintentional Alternate Official TU or something :-)
Dan "far-trader" Burns