Hmmm.
I know I've had my run-ins with Pixie, most recently with RSB (KoTF), but
I'd have to refresh my memory.
To answer the question in general, "how to deal with stupid UPPs?"
1. Welcome to Traveller.
2. Make a good faith attempt, like the first page and a half of any Poul
Anderson chapter.
3. Get tired of having to do it for the umpteen millionth time.
4. Think seriously about making wholesale changes to the published
numbers, including a big event to wipe the slate clean. (Note: we only
changed stars
Bottom line, really, is to consider the world in question. Does it have
published significance? If so, write around it in some fashion, being
consistent in good faith with what has been published. And that
"consistency" includes, sometimes, playing the "everything you thought you
knew was wrong" card, which is an established Traveller tool. (Major
races? Clones? Interdicted worlds?)
UPPs are a mess, which goes back to original LBBs where physical and
cultural parameters varied independently. Various subsequent patches
(there are many editions of the LBBs which do not call attention to
themselves, but which change many basic rules, and it takes a sharp eye to
notice the differences; bottom line, these fixes didn't work as they were
stealth fixes which could not be uniformly applied since you can't readily
tell which edition is which) attempted to lessen that.
Then you add in the fact that UWPs were added around UPPs, in most cases
without any harmonization with UPPs, and the big DGP computer run made it
worse and added in some systematic errors and bad code that kept
re-running subsectors full of 100s you've got a big mess. I really would
have preferred to declare the DGP data null and void, it was non-official
after all, but it had been used by so many people over the years that it
had become quasi-semi official, and would have been a real sign of bad
faith with the people who had been doing their best with it for so long.
But you were asking about Pixie, which as I said, I'll have to refresh my
memory on. And Yaskoydray can do anything, which gives you some leeway.
> Dear Folks -
>
> Hey, since I'm here, and Dave Nilsen is also on this board, can I ask a
> CotI question here?
>
> This started out as a discussion on research stations, then morphed into
> port facilities and a discussion of Pixie. The discussion said "according
> to TCS, its capacity for ship maintenance, repair and building is nil,
> while CT rules would allow ships to be maintained, repaired and built
> there, and TNS in JTAS 2 specifically talks about the GP shipbuilding
> facilities there." (McPerth)
>
> Then Hans said: "I repeat: Pixie, as described in various canonical
> sources, is broken." (Rancke2)
>
> Finally, I asked: "Has anyone ever asked Marc, or Loren, or even Dave N,
> their opinion on how to handle Pixie?
>
> (Was Pixie the site of the Ancient site in the final Trav Digest? Maybe
> that was the answer - the whole Class A 'port and Naval Base are a
> cover-up for Other Things... As Hans has said in the past, this sort of
> explanation works as long as you don't overuse it. If you always have
> something so weird, so outside the normal rules, that you have to justify
> it with more "outside the rules" explanations", something's wrong.)
>
> Occasional is quirky; any more and it gets too much."
>
>
> Sooooo... Dave, what was your (and the Workshop's) approach to places with
> weird stats like Pixie?
>
>
I know I've had my run-ins with Pixie, most recently with RSB (KoTF), but
I'd have to refresh my memory.
To answer the question in general, "how to deal with stupid UPPs?"
1. Welcome to Traveller.
2. Make a good faith attempt, like the first page and a half of any Poul
Anderson chapter.
3. Get tired of having to do it for the umpteen millionth time.
4. Think seriously about making wholesale changes to the published
numbers, including a big event to wipe the slate clean. (Note: we only
changed stars
Bottom line, really, is to consider the world in question. Does it have
published significance? If so, write around it in some fashion, being
consistent in good faith with what has been published. And that
"consistency" includes, sometimes, playing the "everything you thought you
knew was wrong" card, which is an established Traveller tool. (Major
races? Clones? Interdicted worlds?)
UPPs are a mess, which goes back to original LBBs where physical and
cultural parameters varied independently. Various subsequent patches
(there are many editions of the LBBs which do not call attention to
themselves, but which change many basic rules, and it takes a sharp eye to
notice the differences; bottom line, these fixes didn't work as they were
stealth fixes which could not be uniformly applied since you can't readily
tell which edition is which) attempted to lessen that.
Then you add in the fact that UWPs were added around UPPs, in most cases
without any harmonization with UPPs, and the big DGP computer run made it
worse and added in some systematic errors and bad code that kept
re-running subsectors full of 100s you've got a big mess. I really would
have preferred to declare the DGP data null and void, it was non-official
after all, but it had been used by so many people over the years that it
had become quasi-semi official, and would have been a real sign of bad
faith with the people who had been doing their best with it for so long.
But you were asking about Pixie, which as I said, I'll have to refresh my
memory on. And Yaskoydray can do anything, which gives you some leeway.
> Dear Folks -
>
> Hey, since I'm here, and Dave Nilsen is also on this board, can I ask a
> CotI question here?
>
> This started out as a discussion on research stations, then morphed into
> port facilities and a discussion of Pixie. The discussion said "according
> to TCS, its capacity for ship maintenance, repair and building is nil,
> while CT rules would allow ships to be maintained, repaired and built
> there, and TNS in JTAS 2 specifically talks about the GP shipbuilding
> facilities there." (McPerth)
>
> Then Hans said: "I repeat: Pixie, as described in various canonical
> sources, is broken." (Rancke2)
>
> Finally, I asked: "Has anyone ever asked Marc, or Loren, or even Dave N,
> their opinion on how to handle Pixie?
>
> (Was Pixie the site of the Ancient site in the final Trav Digest? Maybe
> that was the answer - the whole Class A 'port and Naval Base are a
> cover-up for Other Things... As Hans has said in the past, this sort of
> explanation works as long as you don't overuse it. If you always have
> something so weird, so outside the normal rules, that you have to justify
> it with more "outside the rules" explanations", something's wrong.)
>
> Occasional is quirky; any more and it gets too much."
>
>
> Sooooo... Dave, what was your (and the Workshop's) approach to places with
> weird stats like Pixie?
>
>