<<my post
snipped>>
What bothers me the most is the fact that there was an almost cavalier attitude towards astronomy in the beginning. But given that Traveller was born out of the "space cowboy" pulp science fiction of the 50s and 60s this can almost be excused. Almost.
*** I think that the setting (astronomy) wasn't so
important to MM and the others at Traveller's creation as the game itself. It
was pretty far down the list. The first sector that came out was the Spinward
Marches and I remember wondering where it was with respect to Earth. It seemed
arbitrary.
Besides RL star and constellation locations consider the following:
-Even though the majority of the star positions are incorrect, the positions of the various rifts are correct to within a few degrees. Care to explain that inconsistency?
Besides RL star and constellation locations consider the following:
-Even though the majority of the star positions are incorrect, the positions of the various rifts are correct to within a few degrees. Care to explain that inconsistency?
*** Coincidence? =)
-Contrary to how they're depicted in the game, the Great and Lesser Rifts
aren't areas of empty space. Stars are rather dirty: constantly emitting charged
hydrogen gas and other ionized particles in their solar winds during their
lifetimes, or spewing them out in giant waves in their death throes. Over the
period of several billion years this emitted gas will accumulate in
enormous clouds, of which the rifts are the most spectacular examples. This same phenomenon is evident in regions of space where stellar density is rather low, so much so that stars in similar regions in our neck of the woods, like the Abyss and the Outrim Void, would appear like headlights haloed by thick fog.
enormous clouds, of which the rifts are the most spectacular examples. This same phenomenon is evident in regions of space where stellar density is rather low, so much so that stars in similar regions in our neck of the woods, like the Abyss and the Outrim Void, would appear like headlights haloed by thick fog.
*** While "unrealistic" the rifts have always
seemed to me to be just plot conveniences.
-Giant stars (sizes I-IV) are generally not good places to put a habitable
zone world. This is acknowledged in some places, but not within the core
rulebooks or WBH and WTG. A giant star is simply a main sequence star in its
death throes. Any main sequence star (size V) that exhausts its hydrogen core,
or close to it, will briefly go through a subgiant phase (size IV), and,
depending
upon its initial size, will continue expanding to a size III (if category A-G), size II (small category B), or size I (if large B or any Category O). This process of evolution usually destroys nearby worlds, and unless its a long period star to begin with (a relatively long lived category G or F that became a size III) the giant does not exist long enough to thaw other nearby planets and bring them up to a habitable state.
upon its initial size, will continue expanding to a size III (if category A-G), size II (small category B), or size I (if large B or any Category O). This process of evolution usually destroys nearby worlds, and unless its a long period star to begin with (a relatively long lived category G or F that became a size III) the giant does not exist long enough to thaw other nearby planets and bring them up to a habitable state.
*** They may be bad for native life to develop on
its own but humanity's lives are but the proverbial blink of an eye to a star.
Even the lifespans of the Imperiums are very short compared to even to the
shortest lived stars. From the game's perspective, they're quite stable and thus
colonizable.
-And if Trav space is supposed to be generic and nondescript, why did they
superdetail the Solomani Rim? The mistakes on the larger sector maps are mainly
ones of nomenclature and therefore fairly easy to fix: shift Canopus into the
Hive Federation, move Spica into the Hinterworlds, and create a new
justification for naming Deneb. By contrast the Rim would require a
complete
redesign: they placed Vega and Arcturus almost 70 to 90 degrees from their actual positions, added stars that belong in neighboring sectors (like Castor, Alpha Indi, Theta Centauri and Epsilon Cygni), and shifted other stars to incorrect positions (Alderamin, Sirius etc...).
redesign: they placed Vega and Arcturus almost 70 to 90 degrees from their actual positions, added stars that belong in neighboring sectors (like Castor, Alpha Indi, Theta Centauri and Epsilon Cygni), and shifted other stars to incorrect positions (Alderamin, Sirius etc...).
*** I think that it was a half assed attempt to reconcile
the TU with reality without screwing up too much.
All of my answers are guesses. If you really want a bona
fide answer, try hunting down MM and emailing him your questions or submit them
through "Ask Avery" at the QLI website. Though, you might want to re-phrase the
questions a bit to make them sound a bit more "polite". One should smile when
pointing out that the Emperor has no clothes. =)
\_/
DED