Thread: Question for the group

Here's something I've often wondered over the years.

The argument has been made that one of the flaws of TNE is that it ruined
the Imperium. (A subset of that is that is was okay to ruin the Imperium,
but Virus was the wrong choice. We'll save that for a different
discussion.)

What do you think, or what do you think other Traveller players in 1993
think we should have done instead?

And I'll start with why we went the way we did.

For my money, we had no choice. When I sat down my first day at GDW, I was
presented with the finished maps of the "Hard Times" maps of the Imperium
spiralling down the toilet. Hard Times was already on the schedule, the
cover had already been printed, and 5000 copies of it were sitting in the
warehouse, and by the way, the book was due to the printers THE DAY AFTER
my first day. Obviously it wasn't going to make it, but just as obviously,
"Hard Times" was going to go out pretty close to the way it already was.

To me, it was not intellectually, emotionally, or ethically honest to
claim that somehow a Miracle Happens and it could be pulled back together.
More logically, the act had been done when MT was launched, and the Hi-Pop
worlds were being raped, and there would be no happy ending. So we had to
let man's foolishness run its course and then start again with a bunch of
plucky souls determined to build a better world. People accused that of
being a "dark setting," but again, I always felt like I had inherited a
"dark setting" and I had to figure out what to do with it. (And yes, as an
aside, Frank had already floated ideas of a computer virus and Star
Vikings, which is whence came DGP's theatrical announcement that they were
leaving. But for the moment, let's assume those were not givens.)

Short of the "shower scene" resolution, which we published in Challenge 59
1/2, and which SJG appropriated for GT, what is another way that we could
have, or should have moved forward? Because to me, the editions of
Traveller which keep moving into the past don't make a whole lot of sense.
The historicity is all wrong. How can characters "change the world" in a
history that is already written?

But that's my analysis, which I applied 20 years ago. What other good
options would you have liked to see, or do you think others would have
preferred?

Dave

TBH, I think TNE did it the best way possible.

Like you said, you can't really just say "a miracle happens" and everything's back to normal again. And the "it was only a dream" response would have been just lame and tacky (though it works for GT since the whole point of GT is that MT/TNE never happened)

I could only really see two ways for it to go, both of which involve the destruction of the 3I.

One is that the Hard Times continue until everyone's completely exhausted. Death by attrition, in other words. Everything collapses, but there's no "killer blow" of secret weapons or Virus or anything else - there's just nobody left to fight anymore. The industrial and tech base is destroyed, nobody's got the gumption or inclination to keep the fighting going. After that, you get another Long Night and lots of pocket empires while people turn inwards and try to survive, and eventually something new will rise from the ashes.

The other is the "killer blow", which is what TNE did. In this, the Hard Times continue, but someone gets stupid and unleashes a "Final Weapon" that brings the teetering edifice crashing down very rapidly. The end result is pretty much the same as TNE - there are long-lasting consequences of the Final Weapon (i.e. vampire fleets, collapse of technology etc), but eventually they are surmounted and new polities rise from the ashes.

In both cases, there's no more 3I, but there's simply no way to avoid that. There HAS to be a Collapse Period after Hard Times either way before people can recover. Either way, peoples' "precious Imperium" is swept away, either slowly-and-painfully or quickly-and-painfully. Personally I think the Virus/Final Weapon approach made things a LOT more interesting (even if there may be some issues with the actual mechanics of it. Though there was a story recently about a chip that can rewrite itself... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-15351071).
Consty

> But that's my analysis, which I applied 20 years ago. What other good
> options would you have liked to see, or do you think others would have
> preferred?
>
> Dave
>

> What do you think, or what do you think other Traveller players in 1993
> think we should have done instead?

Really, I think you were screwed. I completely agree that MT irretrievably
eliminated the Imperium. Hard Times basically meant it could never have
a true successor state.

I also believe that the Hard Times fans were missing one huge point:
without the Virus (or something like it) there was no change for any
Imperial recovery. Why? Because the neighbors would have picked the bones
clean. Without something that leveled *everyone*, then the Aslan, Solomani,
K'kree, and Vargr would have just moved in and cleaned up. There would
never have been the chance for a Fourth Imperium because the tiny and
weak successor states would have been crushed and eliminated by their
powerful neighbors. The only successor state that had any chance to live
was the Domain of Deneb because their big opponent (the Zhodani) had
no interest in taking them over, and the Vargr had better targets.

So, you had to flatten *everyone* and start over. Really, I don't believe
you had a choice. (In fact, I thought that the Empress Wave was solely
there to flatten the Zhodani, since the Virus couldn't get to them. So
even the one major power that escaped Virus unscathed still got hammered.)

My biggest complaint was that the way chosen to flattened everyone
eliminated the history. Sure, you had to flatten everyone, but the
way I saw it done meant that the whole history of what went before
was completely swept away, meaning that everything was starting over
completely fresh. (That was one of the things I really liked about
how Martin recast everything for 1248. He made sure that the pre-
collapse history was still in the background and still fully leveraged
in the setting.) I freely admit that I could have misunderstood that
point.

Mike West

MHO

I think there were probably few, if any real options available to you
other than the one you made with the creation of RCES and the star vikings
with Virus as the overarching villain. Any other approach would have been
in the nature of another long night scenario, which would have been very
difficult to propagate with "The problems from A to Z" along all of the
Imperiums borders. The Imperium might have suicided, but the vargrs are
great scavengers and the Aslan are consumate land grabbers. The K'Kree
wanted to save the galaxy from the evils of Meat, and the Hivers would have
simply manipulated events around them for generations of AMUSEMENT! Not to
mention the ,by then, cultural imperative for the Solomani to punish the
Imperium for it's unforgivable occupation of Mother Terra generations ago,
and grab back all of the old sphere and the vegan autonomous district in
the process.
The Only way hard Times could end is with a long night scenario in
which humans were trying to escape domination by one of the bordering alien
Empires.
Virus was the external super threat that brought the galaxy to it's
knees and preserved a gaming universe in which even little fish in a vast
ocean can have an influence on events that happen far beyond the scope of
the players end of the universe.
My greatest dis-like of classic Traveller (and I still love it BTW)
was that even a group of players in which there was a Marquis and a Baron
and 2 Knights had little or no direct impact on events beyond the scale of
the local landmass, or at most a planetary scale.
One of the things that I believe some people cried about in COTI was
the inclusion of the concept of pocket empires, allowing for a wide
deviation from "Empire as we like it"
However, Pocket empires per se allowed for a GMs dream if they had a
creative bent, total freedom to deviate from empire and create an entire
NEW dynamic in Interstellar Diplomacy. EVEN, if the players were ambitious
enough, to found one of there own.

On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 1:03 AM, <> wrote:

> **
>
>
> Here's something I've often wondered over the years.
>
> The argument has been made that one of the flaws of TNE is that it ruined
> the Imperium. (A subset of that is that is was okay to ruin the Imperium,
> but Virus was the wrong choice. We'll save that for a different
> discussion.)
>
> What do you think, or what do you think other Traveller players in 1993
> think we should have done instead?
>
> And I'll start with why we went the way we did.
>
> For my money, we had no choice. When I sat down my first day at GDW, I was
> presented with the finished maps of the "Hard Times" maps of the Imperium
> spiralling down the toilet. Hard Times was already on the schedule, the
> cover had already been printed, and 5000 copies of it were sitting in the
> warehouse, and by the way, the book was due to the printers THE DAY AFTER
> my first day. Obviously it wasn't going to make it, but just as obviously,
> "Hard Times" was going to go out pretty close to the way it already was.
>
> To me, it was not intellectually, emotionally, or ethically honest to
> claim that somehow a Miracle Happens and it could be pulled back together.
> More logically, the act had been done when MT was launched, and the Hi-Pop
> worlds were being raped, and there would be no happy ending. So we had to
> let man's foolishness run its course and then start again with a bunch of
> plucky souls determined to build a better world. People accused that of
> being a "dark setting," but again, I always felt like I had inherited a
> "dark setting" and I had to figure out what to do with it. (And yes, as an
> aside, Frank had already floated ideas of a computer virus and Star
> Vikings, which is whence came DGP's theatrical announcement that they were
> leaving. But for the moment, let's assume those were not givens.)
>
> Short of the "shower scene" resolution, which we published in Challenge 59
> 1/2, and which SJG appropriated for GT, what is another way that we could
> have, or should have moved forward? Because to me, the editions of
> Traveller which keep moving into the past don't make a whole lot of sense.
> The historicity is all wrong. How can characters "change the world" in a
> history that is already written?
>
> But that's my analysis, which I applied 20 years ago. What other good
> options would you have liked to see, or do you think others would have
> preferred?
>
> Dave
>
>

--
"Christmas is a time when kids tell Santa what they want and adults pay for
it. Deficits are when adults tell the government what they want and their
kids pay for it."

Yeah. Obviously I thought about alternatives, and just as obviously, I
came back to the idea of virus that Frank had floated earlier. But it is
not fair to say that virus was always a foregone conclusion since Frank's
thoughts. That was not a foregone conclusion, and we did not tie ourselves
into that.

However, in considering the alternatives, I found myself drawn back to the
virus idea for two reasons:

1. It would allow Traveller to finally make the leap into actual AI in the
game, an interesting SF component. Traveller had kind of paced around on
the ledge of what is or is not AI, is it TL 16 or what, and rather than try
to convince ourselves, "yeah, this algorithm advance constitutes AI," what
if one of the things just comes at you shooting? That has a tendency to
make you say, "okay, discussion over, it's AI."

2. We had the Cymbeline chip, a long-established, nostalgic CT thing which
we could tie it to, and that would allow us to tie it to things we already
knew were there, and ground Traveller within itself.

Made sense to me, and I ran it past the staff, and everyone was excited by
the new opportunities it would give us. I coined the word "Vampire Ship" to
get Les excited, because I wanted to get him involved as well, and he was
always into monsters. And it did get Les excited, which made me happy. But
he left for TSR shortly after that, which was too bad. More staff is better
than fewer.

On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 05:39:50 -0000, "constantine_

I'm curious what you mean about "flattened the history."

Do you mean "made it irrelevant to the average player?"

If so, that was a deliberate design decision. Part of the input we were
getting was, "Traveller is too hard for new players to get into, they feel
they have to learn too much history, and the names of all the emperors, you
need to fix that." While I didn't necessarily agree, it was a perception,
so we felt like we had to deal with the perception.

So the idea was the RC is for new start-fresh players who are intimidated
by having to learn the names of the emperors, and the Regency is for those
who want that history intact. We were trying to kind of "have the best of
both worlds."

But maybe I'm missing your point.

On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 00:43:19 -0500, "Mike West" <>
wrote:
>> What do you think, or what do you think other Traveller players in
> 1993
> > think we should have done instead?
>
> Really, I think you were screwed. I completely agree that MT
> irretrievably
> eliminated the Imperium. Hard Times basically meant it could never have
> a true successor state.
>
> I also believe that the Hard Times fans were missing one huge point:
> without the Virus (or something like it) there was no change for any
> Imperial recovery. Why? Because the neighbors would have picked the
> bones
> clean. Without something that leveled *everyone*, then the Aslan,
> Solomani,
> K'kree, and Vargr would have just moved in and cleaned up. There would
> never have been the chance for a Fourth Imperium because the tiny and
> weak successor states would have been crushed and eliminated by their
> powerful neighbors. The only successor state that had any chance to
> live
> was the Domain of Deneb because their big opponent (the Zhodani) had
> no interest in taking them over, and the Vargr had better targets.
>
> So, you had to flatten *everyone* and start over. Really, I don't
> believe
> you had a choice. (In fact, I thought that the Empress Wave was solely
> there to flatten the Zhodani, since the Virus couldn't get to them. So
> even the one major power that escaped Virus unscathed still got
> hammered.)
>
> My biggest complaint was that the way chosen to flattened everyone
> eliminated the history. Sure, you had to flatten everyone, but the
> way I saw it done meant that the whole history of what went before
> was completely swept away, meaning that everything was starting over
> completely fresh. (That was one of the things I really liked about
> how Martin recast everything for 1248. He made sure that the pre-
> collapse history was still in the background and still fully leveraged
> in the setting.) I freely admit that I could have misunderstood that
> point.
>
> Mike West
> [1]
>
>
>

Thanks. Yeah, I always thought the pocket empires would be really cool.

Me, personally, as a GM, I had never run a campaign in the Imperium. But
the idea of a pocket empire could have allowed someone like me to lift up
my bundle of worlds, drop them into the TNE universe as a pocket empire,
and be part of the big thing.

By the way, did you know your last name was the secret code name for the
Gygax Dangerous Dimensions--oops, I mean--Journeys project? "The Carpenter
Project." Loren has observed on his website, I think rightly, that the
Carpenter Project pulled a lot of energy away from GDW's own in-house
projects that could have made them more successful. Now, had DJ succeeded,
that point would be moot, its cash inflow could have buoyed up the rest.
But since it got swallowed up in litigation, it made all of that investment
of time and energy a net loss to us.

On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 01:50:29 -0400, Allen Carpenter
<> wrote:
> MHO
>
>      I think there were probably few, if any real options available
> to you other than the one you made with the creation of RCES and the
star
> vikings with Virus as the overarching villain. Any other approach would
> have been in the nature of another long night scenario, which would have
> been very difficult to propagate with "The problems from A to Z" along
> all of the Imperiums borders. The Imperium might have suicided, but the
> vargrs are great scavengers and the Aslan are consumate land grabbers.
> The K'Kree wanted to save the galaxy from the evils of Meat, and the
> Hivers would have simply manipulated events around them for generations
> of AMUSEMENT! Not to mention the ,by then, cultural imperative for the
> Solomani to punish the Imperium for it's unforgivable occupation of
> Mother Terra generations ago, and grab  back all of the old sphere and
> the vegan autonomous district in the process.
>       The Only way hard Times could end is with a long night
> scenario in which humans were trying to escape domination by one of the
> bordering alien Empires.
>      Virus was the external super threat that brought the galaxy to
> it's knees and preserved a gaming universe in which even little fish in
a
> vast ocean can have an influence on events that happen far beyond the
> scope of the players end of the universe.
>      My greatest dis-like of classic Traveller (and I still love it
> BTW) was that even a group of players in which there was a Marquis and a
> Baron and 2 Knights had little or no direct impact on events beyond the
> scale of the local landmass, or at most a planetary scale.
>      One of the things that I believe some people cried about in
> COTI was the inclusion of the concept of pocket empires, allowing for a
> wide deviation from "Empire as we like it"
>       However, Pocket empires per se allowed for a GMs dream if
> they had a creative bent, total freedom to deviate from empire and
create
> an entire NEW dynamic in Interstellar Diplomacy. EVEN, if the players
> were ambitious enough, to found one of there own.
>
> On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 1:03 AM, wrote:
>  
>
> Here's something I've often wondered over the years.
>
> The argument has been made that one of the flaws of TNE is that it
> ruined
> the Imperium. (A subset of that is that is was okay to ruin the
> Imperium,
> but Virus was the wrong choice. We'll save that for a different
> discussion.)
>
> What do you think, or what do you think other Traveller players in 1993
> think we should have done instead?
>
> And I'll start with why we went the way we did.
>
> For my money, we had no choice. When I sat down my first day at GDW, I
> was
> presented with the finished maps of the "Hard Times" maps of the
> Imperium
> spiralling down the toilet. Hard Times was already on the schedule, the
> cover had already been printed, and 5000 copies of it were sitting in
> the
> warehouse, and by the way, the book was due to the printers THE DAY
> AFTER
> my first day. Obviously it wasn't going to make it, but just as
> obviously,
> "Hard Times" was going to go out pretty close to the way it already
> was.
>
> To me, it was not intellectually, emotionally, or ethically honest to
> claim that somehow a Miracle Happens and it could be pulled back
> together.
> More logically, the act had been done when MT was launched, and the
> Hi-Pop
> worlds were being raped, and there would be no happy ending. So we had
> to
> let man's foolishness run its course and then start again with a bunch
> of
> plucky souls determined to build a better world. People accused that of
> being a "dark setting," but again, I always felt like I had inherited a
> "dark setting" and I had to figure out what to do with it. (And yes, as
> an
> aside, Frank had already floated ideas of a computer virus and Star
> Vikings, which is whence came DGP's theatrical announcement that they
> were
> leaving. But for the moment, let's assume those were not givens.)
>
> Short of the "shower scene" resolution, which we published in Challenge
> 59
> 1/2, and which SJG appropriated for GT, what is another way that we
> could
> have, or should have moved forward? Because to me, the editions of
> Traveller which keep moving into the past don't make a whole lot of
> sense.
> The historicity is all wrong. How can characters "change the world" in
> a
> history that is already written?
>
> But that's my analysis, which I applied 20 years ago. What other good
> options would you have liked to see, or do you think others would have
> preferred?
>
> Dave

I am humbly pleased by that, no idea why though, but still cool 8-)
As I sit here lovingly holding my TNE mark 1 mod 1 rulebook 8-)

On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 2:10 AM, <> wrote:

> **
>
>
> Thanks. Yeah, I always thought the pocket empires would be really cool.
>
> Me, personally, as a GM, I had never run a campaign in the Imperium. But
> the idea of a pocket empire could have allowed someone like me to lift up
> my bundle of worlds, drop them into the TNE universe as a pocket empire,
> and be part of the big thing.
>
> By the way, did you know your last name was the secret code name for the
> Gygax Dangerous Dimensions--oops, I mean--Journeys project? "The Carpenter
> Project." Loren has observed on his website, I think rightly, that the
> Carpenter Project pulled a lot of energy away from GDW's own in-house
> projects that could have made them more successful. Now, had DJ succeeded,
> that point would be moot, its cash inflow could have buoyed up the rest.
> But since it got swallowed up in litigation, it made all of that investment
> of time and energy a net loss to us.
>
>
> On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 01:50:29 -0400, Allen Carpenter
> <> wrote:
> > MHO
> >
> > I think there were probably few, if any real options available
> > to you other than the one you made with the creation of RCES and the
> star
> > vikings with Virus as the overarching villain. Any other approach would
> > have been in the nature of another long night scenario, which would have
> > been very difficult to propagate with "The problems from A to Z" along
> > all of the Imperiums borders. The Imperium might have suicided, but the
> > vargrs are great scavengers and the Aslan are consumate land grabbers.
> > The K'Kree wanted to save the galaxy from the evils of Meat, and the
> > Hivers would have simply manipulated events around them for generations
> > of AMUSEMENT! Not to mention the ,by then, cultural imperative for the
> > Solomani to punish the Imperium for it's unforgivable occupation of
> > Mother Terra generations ago, and grab back all of the old sphere and
> > the vegan autonomous district in the process.
> > The Only way hard Times could end is with a long night
> > scenario in which humans were trying to escape domination by one of the
> > bordering alien Empires.
> > Virus was the external super threat that brought the galaxy to
> > it's knees and preserved a gaming universe in which even little fish in
> a
> > vast ocean can have an influence on events that happen far beyond the
> > scope of the players end of the universe.
> > My greatest dis-like of classic Traveller (and I still love it
> > BTW) was that even a group of players in which there was a Marquis and a
> > Baron and 2 Knights had little or no direct impact on events beyond the
> > scale of the local landmass, or at most a planetary scale.
> > One of the things that I believe some people cried about in
> > COTI was the inclusion of the concept of pocket empires, allowing for a
> > wide deviation from "Empire as we like it"
> > However, Pocket empires per se allowed for a GMs dream if
> > they had a creative bent, total freedom to deviate from empire and
> create
> > an entire NEW dynamic in Interstellar Diplomacy. EVEN, if the players
> > were ambitious enough, to found one of there own.
> >
> > On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 1:03 AM, wrote:
> >
> >
> > Here's something I've often wondered over the years.
> >
> > The argument has been made that one of the flaws of TNE is that it
> > ruined
> > the Imperium. (A subset of that is that is was okay to ruin the
> > Imperium,
> > but Virus was the wrong choice. We'll save that for a different
> > discussion.)
> >
> > What do you think, or what do you think other Traveller players in 1993
> > think we should have done instead?
> >
> > And I'll start with why we went the way we did.
> >
> > For my money, we had no choice. When I sat down my first day at GDW, I
> > was
> > presented with the finished maps of the "Hard Times" maps of the
> > Imperium
> > spiralling down the toilet. Hard Times was already on the schedule, the
> > cover had already been printed, and 5000 copies of it were sitting in
> > the
> > warehouse, and by the way, the book was due to the printers THE DAY
> > AFTER
> > my first day. Obviously it wasn't going to make it, but just as
> > obviously,
> > "Hard Times" was going to go out pretty close to the way it already
> > was.
> >
> > To me, it was not intellectually, emotionally, or ethically honest to
> > claim that somehow a Miracle Happens and it could be pulled back
> > together.
> > More logically, the act had been done when MT was launched, and the
> > Hi-Pop
> > worlds were being raped, and there would be no happy ending. So we had
> > to
> > let man's foolishness run its course and then start again with a bunch
> > of
> > plucky souls determined to build a better world. People accused that of
> > being a "dark setting," but again, I always felt like I had inherited a
> > "dark setting" and I had to figure out what to do with it. (And yes, as
> > an
> > aside, Frank had already floated ideas of a computer virus and Star
> > Vikings, which is whence came DGP's theatrical announcement that they
> > were
> > leaving. But for the moment, let's assume those were not givens.)
> >
> > Short of the "shower scene" resolution, which we published in Challenge
> > 59
> > 1/2, and which SJG appropriated for GT, what is another way that we
> > could
> > have, or should have moved forward? Because to me, the editions of
> > Traveller which keep moving into the past don't make a whole lot of
> > sense.
> > The historicity is all wrong. How can characters "change the world" in
> > a
> > history that is already written?
> >
> > But that's my analysis, which I applied 20 years ago. What other good
> > options would you have liked to see, or do you think others would have
> > preferred?
> >
> > Dave
>
>
>

--
"Christmas is a time when kids tell Santa what they want and adults pay for
it. Deficits are when adults tell the government what they want and their
kids pay for it."

Being pleased is its own reward. Enjoy the pleasure, don't worry where it
came from.

Did you know that I personally got yelled at by Gary Gygax on a few
occasions? He also bought me dinner once.

I had camera-ready copies of Mk I Mod 2s of both Core TNE and FF&S, but we
couldn't afford the page changes when we went to reprint, so they didn't
happen. :-(

On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 02:15:36 -0400, Allen Carpenter
<> wrote:
> I am humbly pleased by that, no idea why though, but still cool 8-)
> As I sit here lovingly holding my TNE mark 1 mod 1 rulebook 8-)
>
> On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 2:10 AM, wrote:
>  
>
> Thanks. Yeah, I always thought the pocket empires would be really cool.
>
> Me, personally, as a GM, I had never run a campaign in the Imperium.
> But
> the idea of a pocket empire could have allowed someone like me to lift
> up
> my bundle of worlds, drop them into the TNE universe as a pocket
> empire,
> and be part of the big thing.
>
> By the way, did you know your last name was the secret code name for
> the
> Gygax Dangerous Dimensions--oops, I mean--Journeys project? "The
> Carpenter
> Project." Loren has observed on his website, I think rightly, that the
> Carpenter Project pulled a lot of energy away from GDW's own in-house
> projects that could have made them more successful. Now, had DJ
> succeeded,
> that point would be moot, its cash inflow could have buoyed up the
> rest.
> But since it got swallowed up in litigation, it made all of that
> investment
> of time and energy a net loss to us.
>
> On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 01:50:29 -0400, Allen Carpenter
> wrote:
> > MHO
> >
> >      I think there were probably few, if any real options
> available
> > to you other than the one you made with the creation of RCES and the
> star
> > vikings with Virus as the overarching villain. Any other approach
> would
> > have been in the nature of another long night scenario, which would
> have
> > been very difficult to propagate with "The problems from A to Z"
> along
> > all of the Imperiums borders. The Imperium might have suicided, but
> the
> > vargrs are great scavengers and the Aslan are consumate land
> grabbers.
> > The K'Kree wanted to save the galaxy from the evils of Meat, and the
> > Hivers would have simply manipulated events around them for
> generations
> > of AMUSEMENT! Not to mention the ,by then, cultural imperative for
> the
> > Solomani to punish the Imperium for it's unforgivable occupation of
> > Mother Terra generations ago, and grab  back all of the old sphere
> and
> > the vegan autonomous district in the process.
> >       The Only way hard Times could end is with a long night
> > scenario in which humans were trying to escape domination by one of
> the
> > bordering alien Empires.
> >      Virus was the external super threat that brought the galaxy
> to
> > it's knees and preserved a gaming universe in which even little fish
> in
> a
> > vast ocean can have an influence on events that happen far beyond the
> > scope of the players end of the universe.
> >      My greatest dis-like of classic Traveller (and I still love
> it
> > BTW) was that even a group of players in which there was a Marquis
> and a
> > Baron and 2 Knights had little or no direct impact on events beyond
> the
> > scale of the local landmass, or at most a planetary scale.
> >      One of the things that I believe some people cried about in
> > COTI was the inclusion of the concept of pocket empires, allowing for
> a
> > wide deviation from "Empire as we like it"
> >       However, Pocket empires per se allowed for a GMs dream if
> > they had a creative bent, total freedom to deviate from empire and
> create
> > an entire NEW dynamic in Interstellar Diplomacy. EVEN, if the players
> > were ambitious enough, to found one of there own.
> >
> > On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 1:03 AM, wrote:
> >  
> >
> > Here's something I've often wondered over the years.
> >
> > The argument has been made that one of the flaws of TNE is that it
> > ruined
> > the Imperium. (A subset of that is that is was okay to ruin the
> > Imperium,
> > but Virus was the wrong choice. We'll save that for a different
> > discussion.)
> >
> > What do you think, or what do you think other Traveller players in
> 1993
> > think we should have done instead?
> >
> > And I'll start with why we went the way we did.
> >
> > For my money, we had no choice. When I sat down my first day at GDW,
> I
> > was
> > presented with the finished maps of the "Hard Times" maps of the
> > Imperium
> > spiralling down the toilet. Hard Times was already on the schedule,
> the
> > cover had already been printed, and 5000 copies of it were sitting in
> > the
> > warehouse, and by the way, the book was due to the printers THE DAY
> > AFTER
> > my first day. Obviously it wasn't going to make it, but just as
> > obviously,
> > "Hard Times" was going to go out pretty close to the way it already
> > was.
> >
> > To me, it was not intellectually, emotionally, or ethically honest to
> > claim that somehow a Miracle Happens and it could be pulled back
> > together.
> > More logically, the act had been done when MT was launched, and the
> > Hi-Pop
> > worlds were being raped, and there would be no happy ending. So we
> had
> > to
> > let man's foolishness run its course and then start again with a
> bunch
> > of
> > plucky souls determined to build a better world. People accused that
> of
> > being a "dark setting," but again, I always felt like I had inherited
> a
> > "dark setting" and I had to figure out what to do with it. (And yes,
> as
> > an
> > aside, Frank had already floated ideas of a computer virus and Star
> > Vikings, which is whence came DGP's theatrical announcement that they
> > were
> > leaving. But for the moment, let's assume those were not givens.)
> >
> > Short of the "shower scene" resolution, which we published in
> Challenge
> > 59
> > 1/2, and which SJG appropriated for GT, what is another way that we
> > could
> > have, or should have moved forward? Because to me, the editions of
> > Traveller which keep moving into the past don't make a whole lot of
> > sense.
> > The historicity is all wrong. How can characters "change the world"
> in
> > a
> > history that is already written?
> >
> > But that's my analysis, which I applied 20 years ago. What other good
> > options would you have liked to see, or do you think others would
> have
> > preferred?
> >
> > Dave

ya know, if there are any electronic versions of them around
................... Pidgin has a file sharing function built in 8-)!!!!

On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 2:30 AM, <> wrote:

> **
>
>
> Being pleased is its own reward. Enjoy the pleasure, don't worry where it
> came from.
>
> Did you know that I personally got yelled at by Gary Gygax on a few
> occasions? He also bought me dinner once.
>
> I had camera-ready copies of Mk I Mod 2s of both Core TNE and FF&S, but we
> couldn't afford the page changes when we went to reprint, so they didn't
> happen. :-(
>
>
> On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 02:15:36 -0400, Allen Carpenter
> <> wrote:
> > I am humbly pleased by that, no idea why though, but still cool 8-)
> > As I sit here lovingly holding my TNE mark 1 mod 1 rulebook 8-)
> >
> > On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 2:10 AM, wrote:
> >
> >
> > Thanks. Yeah, I always thought the pocket empires would be really cool.
> >
> > Me, personally, as a GM, I had never run a campaign in the Imperium.
> > But
> > the idea of a pocket empire could have allowed someone like me to lift
> > up
> > my bundle of worlds, drop them into the TNE universe as a pocket
> > empire,
> > and be part of the big thing.
> >
> > By the way, did you know your last name was the secret code name for
> > the
> > Gygax Dangerous Dimensions--oops, I mean--Journeys project? "The
> > Carpenter
> > Project." Loren has observed on his website, I think rightly, that the
> > Carpenter Project pulled a lot of energy away from GDW's own in-house
> > projects that could have made them more successful. Now, had DJ
> > succeeded,
> > that point would be moot, its cash inflow could have buoyed up the
> > rest.
> > But since it got swallowed up in litigation, it made all of that
> > investment
> > of time and energy a net loss to us.
> >
> > On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 01:50:29 -0400, Allen Carpenter
> > wrote:
> > > MHO
> > >
> > > I think there were probably few, if any real options
> > available
> > > to you other than the one you made with the creation of RCES and the
> > star
> > > vikings with Virus as the overarching villain. Any other approach
> > would
> > > have been in the nature of another long night scenario, which would
> > have
> > > been very difficult to propagate with "The problems from A to Z"
> > along
> > > all of the Imperiums borders. The Imperium might have suicided, but
> > the
> > > vargrs are great scavengers and the Aslan are consumate land
> > grabbers.
> > > The K'Kree wanted to save the galaxy from the evils of Meat, and the
> > > Hivers would have simply manipulated events around them for
> > generations
> > > of AMUSEMENT! Not to mention the ,by then, cultural imperative for
> > the
> > > Solomani to punish the Imperium for it's unforgivable occupation of
> > > Mother Terra generations ago, and grab back all of the old sphere
> > and
> > > the vegan autonomous district in the process.
> > > The Only way hard Times could end is with a long night
> > > scenario in which humans were trying to escape domination by one of
> > the
> > > bordering alien Empires.
> > > Virus was the external super threat that brought the galaxy
> > to
> > > it's knees and preserved a gaming universe in which even little fish
> > in
> > a
> > > vast ocean can have an influence on events that happen far beyond the
> > > scope of the players end of the universe.
> > > My greatest dis-like of classic Traveller (and I still love
> > it
> > > BTW) was that even a group of players in which there was a Marquis
> > and a
> > > Baron and 2 Knights had little or no direct impact on events beyond
> > the
> > > scale of the local landmass, or at most a planetary scale.
> > > One of the things that I believe some people cried about in
> > > COTI was the inclusion of the concept of pocket empires, allowing for
> > a
> > > wide deviation from "Empire as we like it"
> > > However, Pocket empires per se allowed for a GMs dream if
> > > they had a creative bent, total freedom to deviate from empire and
> > create
> > > an entire NEW dynamic in Interstellar Diplomacy. EVEN, if the players
> > > were ambitious enough, to found one of there own.
> > >
> > > On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 1:03 AM, wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Here's something I've often wondered over the years.
> > >
> > > The argument has been made that one of the flaws of TNE is that it
> > > ruined
> > > the Imperium. (A subset of that is that is was okay to ruin the
> > > Imperium,
> > > but Virus was the wrong choice. We'll save that for a different
> > > discussion.)
> > >
> > > What do you think, or what do you think other Traveller players in
> > 1993
> > > think we should have done instead?
> > >
> > > And I'll start with why we went the way we did.
> > >
> > > For my money, we had no choice. When I sat down my first day at GDW,
> > I
> > > was
> > > presented with the finished maps of the "Hard Times" maps of the
> > > Imperium
> > > spiralling down the toilet. Hard Times was already on the schedule,
> > the
> > > cover had already been printed, and 5000 copies of it were sitting in
> > > the
> > > warehouse, and by the way, the book was due to the printers THE DAY
> > > AFTER
> > > my first day. Obviously it wasn't going to make it, but just as
> > > obviously,
> > > "Hard Times" was going to go out pretty close to the way it already
> > > was.
> > >
> > > To me, it was not intellectually, emotionally, or ethically honest to
> > > claim that somehow a Miracle Happens and it could be pulled back
> > > together.
> > > More logically, the act had been done when MT was launched, and the
> > > Hi-Pop
> > > worlds were being raped, and there would be no happy ending. So we
> > had
> > > to
> > > let man's foolishness run its course and then start again with a
> > bunch
> > > of
> > > plucky souls determined to build a better world. People accused that
> > of
> > > being a "dark setting," but again, I always felt like I had inherited
> > a
> > > "dark setting" and I had to figure out what to do with it. (And yes,
> > as
> > > an
> > > aside, Frank had already floated ideas of a computer virus and Star
> > > Vikings, which is whence came DGP's theatrical announcement that they
> > > were
> > > leaving. But for the moment, let's assume those were not givens.)
> > >
> > > Short of the "shower scene" resolution, which we published in
> > Challenge
> > > 59
> > > 1/2, and which SJG appropriated for GT, what is another way that we
> > > could
> > > have, or should have moved forward? Because to me, the editions of
> > > Traveller which keep moving into the past don't make a whole lot of
> > > sense.
> > > The historicity is all wrong. How can characters "change the world"
> > in
> > > a
> > > history that is already written?
> > >
> > > But that's my analysis, which I applied 20 years ago. What other good
> > > options would you have liked to see, or do you think others would
> > have
> > > preferred?
> > >
> > > Dave
>
>
>

--
"Christmas is a time when kids tell Santa what they want and adults pay for
it. Deficits are when adults tell the government what they want and their
kids pay for it."

No, they are old-fashioned physical paste-up, with plastic screens and wax
and white tape. We only did two or three full electronic submissions to the
printer: H&I and one or two Challenges, around 76 and 77.

While there were electronic files of the page layouts in Adobe PageMaker I
think, all of the art, table screens, and mathematical formulae like square
roots had to be added by hand. Hard to believe, but 1994-5 was really a
pretty long time ago in terms of electronic publishing.

On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 02:32:33 -0400, Allen Carpenter
<> wrote:
> ya know, if there are any electronic versions of them around
> ................... Pidgin has a file sharing function built in 8-)!!!!
>
> On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 2:30 AM, wrote:
>  
>
> Being pleased is its own reward. Enjoy the pleasure, don't worry where
> it
> came from.
>
> Did you know that I personally got yelled at by Gary Gygax on a few
> occasions? He also bought me dinner once.
>
> I had camera-ready copies of Mk I Mod 2s of both Core TNE and FF">

Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooh!!!!!
What a cruel world. I would literarly sell my first born for this.
<sniffle>
--
Roger Malmstein
www.travellerfreeport.com

From:
Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2012 8:30 AM
To:
Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Question for the group

I had camera-ready copies of Mk I Mod 2s of both Core TNE and FF&S, but we
couldn't afford the page changes when we went to reprint, so they didn't
happen. :-(

Don't do that. Keep your son.

"Man sells son for evil, cult science fiction RPG." That reminds me of
when Frank was GAMA president and he always had to respond to these
newspaper reports about, "D&D killed my son." Ironic that Frank was
defending D&D when TSR was suing us, but life is funny that way.

I still have them. My house was struck by lighting and flooded last
summer, and when I had to move everything out into storage, I found several
boxes of paste-ups in my garage (NOT water damaged), and I'm pretty sure
one of them was FF&S Mk I Mod 2. When I get them back out of storage, I can
try to scan them.

No promises how soon that will be however. :-(

On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 09:07:10 +0200, "Roger Malmstein"
<> wrote:
> Noooooooooooooooooo

Just kidding there of course =0)

But if you still have the paper originals, I would love to scan them and publish them on my website for everyone to download.
There has been various discussions of improving and updating FF&S. One article you find here http://www.travellerfreeport.com/houserules/50-suggested-erratas-and-additions-to-ffas.html

FF&S are probably that tool in the TNE tool box that really defines the universe other than the meta game culture.

I work in the digital printing business so I do have access to pretty decent scanners. I’ll probably do a better jobb than the scan job done to the TNE books for FFE’s TNE CD’s and my web site got more than a terrabyte of free space to store files. Members may even upload their own files.

--
Roger Malmstein
www.travellerfreeport.com

On Sat, Jun 9, 2012 at 10:03 PM, <> wrote:

> Here's something I've often wondered over the years.
>
> The argument has been made that one of the flaws of TNE is that it ruined
> the Imperium. (A subset of that is that is was okay to ruin the Imperium,
> but Virus was the wrong choice. We'll save that for a different
> discussion.)
>
> What do you think, or what do you think other Traveller players in 1993
> think we should have done instead?
>

Not a blessed thing..... Other than reference Hard Times a little more
stridently, but to be honest if you read and played Hard Times the Imperium
was Toast..... So really from the Big Picture, Not a thing...

Short of the "shower scene" resolution, which we published in Challenge 59
> 1/2, and which SJG appropriated for GT, what is another way that we could
> have, or should have moved forward? Because to me, the editions of
> Traveller which keep moving into the past don't make a whole lot of sense.
> The historicity is all wrong. How can characters "change the world" in a
> history that is already written?
>

Yep.

> But that's my analysis, which I applied 20 years ago. What other good
> options would you have liked to see, or do you think others would have
> preferred?

Preferred? I liked the setting, the whole creepy backwaters and monster
ships, brought some bite to the Largely Vanilla Universe. It also allowed
for lots of places for a industrious GM to carve out a campaign space all
of his own. One of the huge problems with the online Traveller Fan-Base is
that they don't play the game, just collect and read it. One of the things
the edition change did was allow more modern SF to be played in the
Traveller Universe, which is one of the huge weaknesses of the
Mega-Traveller edition of the game.
--
Evyn

I am running a Regency TNE game at the moment and having read much of the
back story for the Imperium I can say it was probably time for it to fall
apart. Given the cyclic nature of human behavior any system human will
construct will eventually devolve. But a more scientific reasoning may be
found in the 2nd rule of thermodynamics, ordered system move towards
disorder or entropy theory.

But really I think it may have been possible for the imperium to fall into
warring client empires instead of a complete meltdown. While the Virus is
an interesting catalyst I feel that humans can be
incredibly ingenuousness when pushed into a corner.

A splintered state scenario gives several advantages.
1. GMs get the choice from several 'tones' where they want to set their
campaigns.
2. Several splinter states allows for epic space conflicts if that is what
a GM wants
3. Struggles for contested world resources is a perfect military setting
campaign where the GM can just pick the splinter states he wasn't involved
4. A splintered state scenario also allows for espionage setting campaigns
as empires trying to via for political, technological, or military
superiority over enemies AND allies.
5. Multi-sided conflicts lets profiteering abound, pirates, corsairs,
blackmarketeers, smugglers all have a chance to play a part in the setting
allowing a multitude of possible roleplaying opportunities for campaigns.
6. The 'Firefly' scenario is very viable also in a splintered state setting
where the player's are on the fringes of the empires trying to make a
living.

The major downside;
1. Content creation is a multi-headed hydra to wrangle.
2. It costs more for a company to do because of the added personnel
required to write and fact check content.

In short its more work and costs more to do but is the 'best' solution in
my opinion.

On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 2:40 AM, Evyn MacDude <> wrote:

> **
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jun 9, 2012 at 10:03 PM, <> wrote:
>
>> Here's something I've often wondered over the years.
>>
>> The argument has been made that one of the flaws of TNE is that it ruined
>> the Imperium. (A subset of that is that is was okay to ruin the Imperium,
>> but Virus was the wrong choice. We'll save that for a different
>> discussion.)
>>
>> What do you think, or what do you think other Traveller players in 1993
>> think we should have done instead?
>>
>
> Not a blessed thing..... Other than reference Hard Times a little more
> stridently, but to be honest if you read and played Hard Times the Imperium
> was Toast..... So really from the Big Picture, Not a thing...
>
> Short of the "shower scene" resolution, which we published in Challenge 59
>> 1/2, and which SJG appropriated for GT, what is another way that we could
>> have, or should have moved forward? Because to me, the editions of
>> Traveller which keep moving into the past don't make a whole lot of sense.
>> The historicity is all wrong. How can characters "change the world" in a
>> history that is already written?
>>
>
> Yep.
>
>
>> But that's my analysis, which I applied 20 years ago. What other good
>> options would you have liked to see, or do you think others would have
>> preferred?
>
>
> Preferred? I liked the setting, the whole creepy backwaters and monster
> ships, brought some bite to the Largely Vanilla Universe. It also allowed
> for lots of places for a industrious GM to carve out a campaign space all
> of his own. One of the huge problems with the online Traveller Fan-Base is
> that they don't play the game, just collect and read it. One of the things
> the edition change did was allow more modern SF to be played in the
> Traveller Universe, which is one of the huge weaknesses of the
> Mega-Traveller edition of the game.
> --
> Evyn
>
>
>

--
If the world was fair then every bad thing that has ever happened to you
would have been deserved.

were there any early drafts of Regency Starship Guide? even
though my campaigns were Coalition, I find myself liking the
Regency SB and vehicle guide the most outside of Path of Tears
and FFS.

___
>From my Galaxy SII

-------- Original message --------
Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Question for the group



Don't do that. Keep your son.

"Man sells son for evil, cult science fiction RPG." That reminds
me of
when Frank was GAMA president and he always had to respond to
these
newspaper reports about, "D&D killed my son." Ironic that Frank
was
defending D&D when TSR was suing us, but life is funny that way.

I still have them. My house was struck by lighting and flooded
last
summer, and when I had to move everything out into storage, I
found several
boxes of paste-ups in my garage (NOT water damaged), and I'm
pretty sure
one of them was FF&S Mk I Mod 2. When I get them back out of
storage, I can
try to scan them.

No promises how soon that will be however. :-(

On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 09:07:10 +0200, "Roger Malmstein"
<
<starwolf%

So here’s my point of view.

Since we have started playing Traveller less than 20 years ago (which makes me a youngster in Traveller community), our main concern was the overwhelming depth of materials published for Traveller over the previous 15 years. TNE gave new players a great opportunity to jump right into this game without the need to look for hundreds of supplements. You could just start an RC campaign with your character’s knowledge very similar to your knowledge of what’s happening outside.

Also, I have always envisioned RC setting as very similar to T:2000. There’s been a war, you have no idea who’s still out there and who’s not, and you’re pretty much on your own. (As a side note I should point out, that in T2k we didn’t play the American remnants of the 5th Div, but chose Polish 1st Free Legion from Leszno, which is 50 km (30mi) from where I actually live now. Their main goal was to survive first, and after that you can try to rebuild some sort of civilization – sounds familiar?)

For those who longed and pined for the Imperium there was always Regency. So when we finally got our hands on some Traveller resources from previous editions, we started a Regency campaign.

What could you do with MT? Over the years I’ve heard that all materials for MT where in desperate need of errata, so, from publishing point of view I think, that a fresh start was something that was needed.

Probably the most controversial issue was the Virus, but you already know this from the wars on the Internet and names you’ve been called by some people. To me Virus is not as inconceivable as some say. Given the data you had on Cymbeline chips, the need for a force that could put an end to the war (in one way or the other) is plausible at least. Besides, knowing how technology and computers have changed over the past 20 years I say you were right. And all those people who couldn’t suspend their disbelief for Virus, yet still believed in Cat-samurai, psionics and wolfs in space can go f…ishing.

As stated in PoT, the Virus is not what runs the Traveller Universe. “Finally, and most importantly, avoid filling your campaign with Virus. The effects of Virus are omnipresent, but the actual reality of Virus should be very rare…” PoT p.143

The “Shower incident” is what GT did to Traveller. If I were an MT player or referee I would most probably feel at least a little offended if you said: “Hey guys, you remember the last couple of years worth of books? Well, it didn’t happen.”

All in all, you made a good and reasonable decision to move Traveller forwards.

p.s. I also had great fun reading H&I. It helped me to understand the manipulative nature of the evil starfish, and San*klaas is definitely one of my favorites.

Cheers,

Blase

From: [] On Behalf Of
Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2012 7:03 AM
To:
Subject: [Traveller_TNE] Question for the group

Here's something I've often wondered over the years.

The argument has been made that one of the flaws of TNE is that it ruined
the Imperium. (A subset of that is that is was okay to ruin the Imperium,
but Virus was the wrong choice. We'll save that for a different
discussion.)

What do you think, or what do you think other Traveller players in 1993
think we should have done instead?

And I'll start with why we went the way we did.

For my money, we had no choice. When I sat down my first day at GDW, I was
presented with the finished maps of the "Hard Times" maps of the Imperium
spiralling down the toilet. Hard Times was already on the schedule, the
cover had already been printed, and 5000 copies of it were sitting in the
warehouse, and by the way, the book was due to the printers THE DAY AFTER
my first day. Obviously it wasn't going to make it, but just as obviously,
"Hard Times" was going to go out pretty close to the way it already was.

To me, it was not intellectually, emotionally, or ethically honest to
claim that somehow a Miracle Happens and it could be pulled back together.
More logically, the act had been done when MT was launched, and the Hi-Pop
worlds were being raped, and there would be no happy ending. So we had to
let man's foolishness run its course and then start again with a bunch of
plucky souls determined to build a better world. People accused that of
being a "dark setting," but again, I always felt like I had inherited a
"dark setting" and I had to figure out what to do with it. (And yes, as an
aside, Frank had already floated ideas of a computer virus and Star
Vikings, which is whence came DGP's theatrical announcement that they were
leaving. But for the moment, let's assume those were not givens.)

Short of the "shower scene" resolution, which we published in Challenge 59
1/2, and which SJG appropriated for GT, what is another way that we could
have, or should have moved forward? Because to me, the editions of
Traveller which keep moving into the past don't make a whole lot of sense.
The historicity is all wrong. How can characters "change the world" in a
history that is already written?

But that's my analysis, which I applied 20 years ago. What other good
options would you have liked to see, or do you think others would have
preferred?

Dave

Thanks, Evyn.

What do you mean by, "reference Hard Times a little more stridently"?

As you observed, making it possible to play more modern SF was also a
deliberate design intent, in both meanings of the phrase, actually (more
other current literary universes as well as modern SF not as far in the
future). Actually quite a bit of effort especially in places like FF&S.

Dave

On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 02:40:37 -0700, Evyn MacDude <>
wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 9, 2012 at 10:03 PM, wrote:
> Here's something I've often wondered over the years.
>
> The argument has been made that one of the flaws of TNE is that it
> ruined
> the Imperium. (A subset of that is that is was okay to ruin the
> Imperium,
> but Virus was the wrong choice. We'll save that for a different
> discussion.)
>
> What do you think, or what do you think other Traveller players in 1993
> think we should have done instead?
>
> Not a blessed thing..... Other than reference 

Hi Dave,

When I saw your application to the ml, I was wondering if you were just
going to lurk in anonymity or engage. Considering how quiet this list
has been over the last few years, I wasn't sure how you'd react.

Then I check in this morning and find over a hundred messages posted. My
first thought was, "Oh no, flame war. Did Tim (our moderator) get
overwhelmed?" Then I saw that it was the exact opposite. Phew!

Glad to see your arrival on this list is a good one, Dave.

\_/
DED
TNE @ Yahoo ml Admin

=======================================

Posted by: "David"
<?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Hey> dcnilsen13
<http://profiles.yahoo.com/dcnilsen13>
Sat Jun 9, 2012 11:17 am (PDT)

I was feeling kind of retrospective lately, and Googled "I love
Traveller the New Era," mostly just to see if anyone ever said that,
which led me to "Tales of an Old School Gamer," which led me to BARD,
which led me here.

So I thought I'd say, "Hi," and also, I'm glad that what we did so long
ago still pleases some people. Sorry we weren't able to stay around to
finish what we started.

Dave Nilsen

John--

I think you're right, and the main reason we didn't go with that scenario
is that was just what MT supposedly was all about, and blew it. It didn't
seem like a good idea to say, "remember that thing we just tried? We're
going to try it again and do it right."

Dave

On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 07:53:56 -0700, John Potter <>
wrote:
> I am running a Regency TNE game at the moment and having read much of
> the back story for the Imperium I can say it was probably time for it to
> fall apart. Given the cyclic nature of human behavior any system human
> will construct will eventually devolve. But a more scientific reasoning
> may be found in the 2nd rule of thermodynamics, ordered system move
> towards disorder or entropy theory. 
> But really I think it may have been possible for the imperium to fall
> into warring client empires instead of a complete meltdown. While the
> Virus is an interesting catalyst I feel that humans can be
> incredibly ingenuousness when pushed into a corner. 
> A splintered state scenario gives several advantages. 1. GMs get the
> choice from several 'tones' where they want to set their campaigns.2.
> Several splinter states allows for epic space conflicts if that is what
a
> GM wants 3. Struggles for contested world resources is a perfect
military
> setting campaign where the GM can just pick the splinter states he
wasn't
> involved4. A splintered state scenario also allows for espionage setting
> campaigns as empires trying to via for political, technological, or
> military superiority over enemies AND allies. 5. Multi-sided conflicts
> lets profiteering abound, pirates, corsairs, blackmarketeers, smugglers
> all have a chance to play a part in the setting allowing a multitude of
> possible roleplaying opportunities for campaigns. 6. The 'Firefly'
> scenario is very viable also in a splintered state setting where the
> player's are on the fringes of the empires trying to make a living.
> The major downside; 1. Content creation is a multi-headed hydra to
> wrangle.2. It costs more for a company to do because of the added
> personnel required to write and fact check content.
> In short its more work and costs more to do but is the 'best' solution
> in my opinion.
>
> On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 2:40 AM, Evyn MacDude wrote:
>  
>
> On Sat, Jun 9, 2012 at 10:03 PM, wrote:
> Here's something I've often wondered over the years.
>
> The argument has been made that one of the flaws of TNE is that it
> ruined
> the Imperium. (A subset of that is that is was okay to ruin the
> Imperium,
> but Virus was the wrong choice. We'll save that for a different
> discussion.)
>
> What do you think, or what do you think other Traveller players in 1993
> think we should have done instead?
>
> Not a blessed thing..... Other than reference Hard Times a little more
> stridently, but to be honest if you read and played Hard Times the
> Imperium was Toast..... So really from the Big Picture, Not a thing...
> Short of the "shower scene" resolution, which we published in Challenge
> 59
> 1/2, and which SJG appropriated for GT, what is another way that we
> could
> have, or should have moved forward? Because to me, the editions of
> Traveller which keep moving into the past don't make a whole lot of
> sense.
> The historicity is all wrong. How can characters "change the world" in
> a
> history that is already written?
>
> Yep. But that's my analysis, which I applied 20 years ago. What other
> good
> options would you have liked to see, or do you think others would have
> preferred?
> Preferred? I liked the setting, the whole creepy backwaters and monster
> ships, brought some bite to the Largely Vanilla Universe. It also
> allowed for lots of places for a industrious GM to carve out
> a campaign space all of his own. One of the huge problems with the
> online Traveller Fan-Base is that they don't play the game, just collect
> and read it. One of the things the edition change did was allow more
> modern SF to be played in the Traveller Universe, which is one of the
> huge weaknesses of the Mega-Traveller edition of the game. --
> Evyn

I was working on the design of RSG when we lost our art director and I got
pulled back off of RSG to make sure that RCVG got typeset and out the door.

I was partway along with Regency (TL-15) variants of the common starships,
and also the Fer-de-Lance and Chrysanthemum class DEs from Book 9. I think
1000 tons was about as big as I was going to go, though. There were going
to be sub-classes of some of those DEs, one of them called the
Uemura-class. I still have the Mac that those files were on, but don't
remember my password anymore, and with the age of the drive it could all be
corrupted anyway.

On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 08:37:02 -0700 (PDT), ""
<> wrote:
> were there any early drafts of Regency Starship Guide? even though my
> campaigns were Coalition, I find myself liking the Regency SB and
vehicle
> guide the most outside of Path of Tears
> and FFS.
>
> ___
> From my Galaxy SII
>
> -------- Original message --------
Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Question for the group

>
> Don't do that. Keep your son.
>
> "Man sells son for evil, cult science fiction RPG." That reminds me of
> when Frank was GAMA president and he always had to respond to these
> newspaper reports about, "D&D killed my son." Ironic that Frank was
> defending D&D when TSR was suing us, but life is funny that way.
>
> I still have them. My house was struck by lighting and flooded last
> summer, and when I had to move everything out into storage, I found
> several
> boxes of paste-ups in my garage (NOT water damaged), and I'm pretty
> sure
> one of them was FFFONT-SIZE: 12pt;">
> >
> >

Dave,
Long time lurker and short time poster. I am GLAD to see you here.
Personally, I think the controversy about TNE is a bit silly. At best, a
permanently shattered Imperium would have resulted from the horror of the
Rebellion. Nobody was going to kiss and make up after what had gone on,
especially after the Black War. Problem is, then everybody starts to pick
factions and then you get the problems you have now with the Battletech
folks where they are going on and on about how the writers are screwing
"their" faction. And as you said often, all the factions were pretty
morally questionable after the Black War. Traveller is supposed to stand
for something, and I for one am glad you reminded us of that. I think MJD
did a good job of taking that ball and running with it in 1248, but I do
wonder, in so far that you can tell us, what was going to be ahead for the
RC and the Regency?

Jason

On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 1:32 PM, <> wrote:

> **
>
>
> I was working on the design of RSG when we lost our art director and I got
> pulled back off of RSG to make sure that RCVG got typeset and out the door.
>
> I was partway along with Regency (TL-15) variants of the common starships,
> and also the Fer-de-Lance and Chrysanthemum class DEs from Book 9. I think
> 1000 tons was about as big as I was going to go, though. There were going
> to be sub-classes of some of those DEs, one of them called the
> Uemura-class. I still have the Mac that those files were on, but don't
> remember my password anymore, and with the age of the drive it could all be
> corrupted anyway.
>
> On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 08:37:02 -0700 (PDT), ""
> <> wrote:
> > were there any early drafts of Regency Starship Guide? even though my
> > campaigns were Coalition, I find myself liking the Regency SB and
> vehicle
> > guide the most outside of Path of Tears
> > and FFS.
> >
> > ___
> > From my Galaxy SII
> >
> > -------- Original message --------
Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Question for the group

> >
> > Don't do that. Keep your son.
> >
> > "Man sells son for evil, cult science fiction RPG." That reminds me of
> > when Frank was GAMA president and he always had to respond to these
> > newspaper reports about, "D&D killed my son." Ironic that Frank was
> > defending D&D when TSR was suing us, but life is funny that way.
> >
> > I still have them. My house was struck by lighting and flooded last
> > summer, and when I had to move everything out into storage, I found
> > several
> > boxes of paste-ups in my garage (NOT water damaged), and I'm pretty
> > sure
> > one of them was FFFONT-SIZE: 12pt;">
> > >
> > >

Thanks Blase. Your message made me laugh out loud at one point.

I think it's really cool that, with all of the T2K stuff we did in Poland
(which to the American players was just one more place they'd never visit),
that it actually allowed you guys to play in your own back yard.

One thing you said that really piques my interest is, " Since we have
started playing Traveller less than 20 years ago (which makes me a
youngster in Traveller community), our main concern was the overwhelming
depth of materials published for Traveller over the previous 15 years. "

So would you say that you were one of the people that DID find the
Imperial Traveller background intimidating or off-putting? Because as I've
said, we did a lot of things to deliberately address that perception, but
I'm curious to hear from someone who might say, "Yes, I was definitely one
of those guys, and here's how it felt."

On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 17:54:21 +0200, Błażej Mazur <> wrote:
> So here’s my point of view.
>
> Since we have started playing Traveller less than 20 years ago (which
> makes me a youngster in Traveller community), our main concern was the
> overwhelming depth of materials published for Traveller over the
previous
> 15 years. TNE gave new players a great opportunity to jump right into
> this game without the need to look for hundreds of supplements. You
could
> just start an RC campaign with your character’s knowledge very similar
> to your knowledge of what’s happening outside.
>
> Also, I have always envisioned RC setting as very similar to T:2000.
> There’s been a war, you have no idea who’s still out there and
> who’s not, and you’re pretty much on your own. (As a side note I
> should point out, that in T2k we didn’t play the American remnants of
> the 5th Div, but chose Polish 1st Free Legion from Leszno, which is 50
km
> (30mi) from where I actually live now. Their main goal was to survive
> first, and after that you can try to rebuild some sort of civilization
> – sounds familiar?)
>
> For those who longed and pined for the Imperium there was always
> Regency. So when we finally got our hands on some Traveller resources
> from previous editions, we started a Regency campaign.
>
> What could you do with MT? Over the years I’ve heard that all
> materials for MT where in desperate need of errata, so, from publishing
> point of view I think, that a fresh start was something that was needed.

>
> Probably the most controversial issue was the Virus, but you already
> know this from the wars on the Internet and names you’ve been called by
> some people. To me Virus is not as inconceivable as some say. Given the
> data you had on Cymbeline chips, the need for a force that could put an
> end to the war (in one way or the other) is plausible at least. Besides,
> knowing how technology and computers have changed over the past 20 years
> I say you were right. And all those people who couldn’t suspend their
> disbelief for Virus, yet still believed in Cat-samurai, psionics and
> wolfs in space can go f…ishing.
>
> As stated in PoT, the Virus is not what runs the Traveller Universe.
> “Finally, and most importantly, avoid filling your campaign with Virus.
> The effects of Virus are omnipresent, but the actual reality of Virus
> should be very rare…” PoT p.143
>
> The “Shower incident” is what GT did to Traveller. If I were an MT
> player or referee I would most probably feel at least a little offended
> if you said: “Hey guys, you remember the last couple of years worth of
> books? Well, it didn’t happen.”
>
> All in all, you made a good and reasonable decision to move Traveller
> forwards.
>
> p.s. I also had great fun reading Hcolor:#1F497D;

In regards to the question, "What could have been done differently?"

I think one other options would have been to have a bigger skip.
Instead of only going 70 years into the future, go way more. Add on
one or two centuries and really break with the past going forward.
Doing this would eliminate the whole "hot corpse" scenario, as even
Virus would be beaten down and be very rare in the new scenario.
It also eliminates much of the "transfer scenarios" that are suggested
to help players bridge the gap (as it is a lot harder to get a situation
where you can successfully sleep through 150-250 years instead of
"just" 70 years). It can still be done, but it is harder to set up.

However, it would let you have the chance to do a few good things,
too:
- Stone cold dead worlds with their artifacts are their own special
types of scenario, and would be more prevalent in this setting.
- You eliminate a lot (if not almost all) of the precarious worlds and
ground the setting on actually habitable worlds. Dangerous worlds
are now actually dangerous (not being able to breathe should be
dangerous).
- You can lock down the TL a lot more so that you don't have to
worry about whole fleets of TL15 ships floating around waiting to
be found and either used or kill you. The old stuff can now only be
found in very small quantities. TL11 or TL12 *means* TL11 or TL12.
- You can force a small ship universe, if you so desire. TNE seemed
to be an attempt at that direction, but there were too many big
ships remaining. With all of the old stuff now completely gone (or
nearly so), you can really have a truly small ship universe.
- Virus can still be there, but you don't have to worry as much about
all of the intermediary stages anymore. Now you can just have the
evolved strains. They are also much, much rarer, which makes them
all the more terrifying and real when finally encountered.

Oh, and the Regency would have been harder to do, but not impossible.
It definitely would no longer have been a "Regency", but whatever
form the Regency ended up in would be OK. It would still allow a tie
back to the Imperium of ole, even if it was still just a vestige of its
former self. It could also serve as the last remnant of high-tech
capabilities. (Along with the conniving Hivers.)

That is not to say this would be a *better* solution. But it is a good
alternative that could have worked.

Mike West

Yes, I was rather overwhelmed by the sheer amount of data published for Traveller. And bear in mind, that Poland in the early 90s was not a place where you could find things you wanted just like that. It was time before ebay; well, I remember that in 1994 there was 1 (one) private computer with internet connection in my town of 70,000.

Right now I have 3 shelves of Traveller books from different editions and when I showed them to my new group they said something along the lines of: “there must be more information to remember in those books that in Encyclopaedia Britannica”, and “instead of reading this get a life”.

But to me the richness of the background makes it now the biggest advantage of TNE over the other editions. Even if some players get their hands on something from CT I can just use what I like and say, that due to Collapse your data on this system is slightly outdated.

And as for the errata, GDW did something that some companies still have to learn. You valued your customers. And just for the fact that GDW had published for 22 years with one book, game or supplement every 22 days on average (taken from FFE’s website) and your stories how certain things had to be put together in a day or two before they were sent to printers, one should be grateful that you commit to making a mistake and try to fix it.

Cheers,

Blase

p.s. If you’re in Germany, or anywhere in Europe for that matter, feel free to come over. I owe you at least a pint of good Polish beer, and a tour of the places you wrote about in T2K

From: [] On Behalf Of
Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2012 7:40 PM
To:
Subject: RE: [Traveller_TNE] Question for the group

Thanks Blase. Your message made me laugh out loud at one point.

I think it's really cool that, with all of the T2K stuff we did in Poland
(which to the American players was just one more place they'd never visit),
that it actually allowed you guys to play in your own back yard.

One thing you said that really piques my interest is, " Since we have
started playing Traveller less than 20 years ago (which makes me a
youngster in Traveller community), our main concern was the overwhelming
depth of materials published for Traveller over the previous 15 years. "

So would you say that you were one of the people that DID find the
Imperial Traveller background intimidating or off-putting? Because as I've
said, we did a lot of things to deliberately address that perception, but
I'm curious to hear from someone who might say, "Yes, I was definitely one
of those guys, and here's how it felt."

On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 17:54:21 +0200, Błażej Mazur < <> > wrote:
> So here’s my point of view.
>
> Since we have started playing Traveller less than 20 years ago (which
> makes me a youngster in Traveller community), our main concern was the
> overwhelming depth of materials published for Traveller over the
previous
> 15 years. TNE gave new players a great opportunity to jump right into
> this game without the need to look for hundreds of supplements. You
could
> just start an RC campaign with your character’s knowledge very similar
> to your knowledge of what’s happening outside.
>
> Also, I have always envisioned RC setting as very similar to T:2000.
> There’s been a war, you have no idea who’s still out there and
> who’s not, and you’re pretty much on your own. (As a side note I
> should point out, that in T2k we didn’t play the American remnants of
> the 5th Div, but chose Polish 1st Free Legion from Leszno, which is 50
km
> (30mi) from where I actually live now. Their main goal was to survive
> first, and after that you can try to rebuild some sort of civilization
> – sounds familiar?)
>
> For those who longed and pined for the Imperium there was always
> Regency. So when we finally got our hands on some Traveller resources
> from previous editions, we started a Regency campaign.
>
> What could you do with MT? Over the years I’ve heard that all
> materials for MT where in desperate need of errata, so, from publishing
> point of view I think, that a fresh start was something that was needed.

>
> Probably the most controversial issue was the Virus, but you already
> know this from the wars on the Internet and names you’ve been called by
> some people. To me Virus is not as inconceivable as some say. Given the
> data you had on Cymbeline chips, the need for a force that could put an
> end to the war (in one way or the other) is plausible at least. Besides,
> knowing how technology and computers have changed over the past 20 years
> I say you were right. And all those people who couldn’t suspend their
> disbelief for Virus, yet still believed in Cat-samurai, psionics and
> wolfs in space can go f…ishing.
>
> As stated in PoT, the Virus is not what runs the Traveller Universe.
> “Finally, and most importantly, avoid filling your campaign with Virus.
> The effects of Virus are omnipresent, but the actual reality of Virus
> should be very rare…” PoT p.143
>
> The “Shower incident” is what GT did to Traveller. If I were an MT
> player or referee I would most probably feel at least a little offended
> if you said: “Hey guys, you remember the last couple of years worth of
> books? Well, it didn’t happen.”
>
> All in all, you made a good and reasonable decision to move Traveller
> forwards.
>

Thanks, Jason.

As I said in a post yesterday, it was important to me to keep some kind of
moral compass in TNE. And while I don't claim that makes me unique, I was
concious while I was doing it, that that didn't seem really typical of
Traveller before. So thanks for noticing.

I don't know if you saw my message yesterday about RC and Regency, because
I think I did talk about that, but they would eventually meet midway
between their areas and have some initial disagreements. In reality, they
would both be very similar, but they would also have some very firm
"articles of faith" which would cloud the ability to see their common cause
(like, oh, say Republicans and Democrats), and temporarily let the details
of their differences get in the way of the bigger picture. In the long run,
both stood for re-establishing a fair, just, stable interstellar society
with input from the citizens, and that would happen. But the "Star
Vikings," and by this I mean the experienced RC combat forces out on the
leading edge of RC expansion, and not all of the members of the RC in
general, would have to make some of the hard choices, using their expertise
with Virus (via Sandman, Guilded Lilly, that shipyard in Diaspora) to
defeat the Lucan-organized virus out of the Black Curtain. This would have
something of a backlash against them, you know that idea that when you're
trying to build a lasting peace, you don't want to have the people with
blood on their hands standing by too closely, and the bulk of the "Star
Viking" forces would head Coreward to deal with the emerging Empress Wave
threat/mystery. This would both get their polarizing influence out of the
way of the reconciliation, and allow them to continue to have a valid and
important input to the future, although not as part of the home-front
status quo. The RC would also have the Ithklur with them, as well as some
of the Hivers who sided with the RC when the failed manipulation to conceal
the destruction of the human planet was exposed. So both the RC and Regency
would become part of a larger restored interstellar society, but many of
the characters themselves would live on in various adventures on the new
frontiers. And in game publication terms, that would have taken five years
easily. Probably more, as we would have discovered lots of intriguing
side-trips along the way.

Is that what you meant?

On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 13:35:15 -0400, Jason Weiser <>
wrote:
> Dave,
>  Long time lurker and short time poster.  I am GLAD to see you here.
> Personally, I think the controversy about TNE is a bit silly. At best, a
> permanently shattered Imperium would have resulted from the horror of
the
> Rebellion. Nobody was going to kiss and make up after what had gone on,
> especially after the Black War. Problem is, then everybody starts to
pick
> factions and then you get the problems you have now with the Battletech
> folks where they are going on and on about how the writers are screwing
> "their" faction. And as you said often, all the factions were pretty
> morally questionable after the Black War. Traveller is supposed to stand
> for something, and I for one am glad you reminded us of that. I think
MJD
> did a good job of taking that ball and running with it in 1248, but I do
> wonder, in so far that you can tell us, what was going to be ahead for
> the RC and the Regency?
>
>    Jason
>
> On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 1:32 PM, wrote:
>  
>
> I was working on the design of RSG when we lost our art director and I
> got
> pulled back off of RSG to make sure that RCVG got typeset and out the
> door.
>
> I was partway along with Regency (TL-15) variants of the common
> starships,
> and also the Fer-de-Lance and Chrysanthemum class DEs from Book 9. I
> think
> 1000 tons was about as big as I was going to go, though. There were
> going
> to be sub-classes of some of those DEs, one of them called the
> Uemura-class. I still have the Mac that those files were on, but don't
> remember my password anymore, and with the age of the drive it could
> all be
> corrupted anyway.
>
> On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 08:37:02 -0700 (PDT), " [2]"
> wrote:
> > were there any early drafts of Regency Starship Guide? even though my
> > campaigns were Coalition, I find myself liking the Regency SB and
> vehicle
> > guide the most outside of Path of Tears
> > and FFS.
> >
> > ___
> > From my Galaxy SII
> >
> > -------- Original message --------
Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Question for the group

> >
> > Don't do that. Keep your son.
> >
> > "Man sells son for evil, cult science fiction RPG." That reminds me
> of
> > when Frank was GAMA president and he always had to respond to these
> > newspaper reports about, "D&D killed my son." Ironic that Frank was
> > defending D">
> > >
> > >

I'm glad you brought that up.

For some reason, when people said, "1200 was too soon, you should have had
it be longer," that really made me think, "Oh crap, did I screw that up?"

Another reason people gave for longer-is-better is that it would be more
realistic for those sort of legends/mystery things like in James
Maliszewsi's adventure, divergence of language, etc., which I think had a
point.

The reason I gravitated to 1200 was, I think, it was a nice, round number
(I know that sounds stupid) for a new beginning, and the fact that I was
REALLY trying to make it as easy as possible for existing campaigns to
somehow bridge the gap. I know that probably sounds stupid too, "Hey
butthead, you broke the whole Imperium, but you claim you're trying to make
it easier?" But really, I was always trying to think of entry points for
players: new players in the RC or pocket empires or not in the official
background at all, old players in the Regency or as remnants in the RC or
Wilds or pocket empires. To me, given the fact that we decided we "had" to
go with the full break, it was really a moral requirement on me to somehow
give as much of a fighting chance to existing players to bring their
characters forward.

But, like I said, wondering, "Man, should I have gone with 1300 or 1400?"
really did make me think.

On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 12:42:01 -0500, "Mike West" <>
wrote:
> In regards to the question, "What could have been done differently?

Blase--

Thank you very much for that, and you made me laugh out loud again.

By the way, I'm glad you guys are in NATO now, and not the Warsaw Pact.

That's an interesting reaction from your players, and one that reminds me
that we weren't being completely stupid when we tried to simplify the game
for newcomers. The funny thing is, my Traveller players never felt like
they had to learn anything about the game background. As the GM, they just
expected I would let them know what they needed to know, and I guess I was
cooperative. Of course my campaign wasn't in the Imperium anyway.

Actually, I didn't really put Hard Times together in a day, it took a lot
longer than that. But that was the date on the schedule when I got there.
But yes, we did have to do a lot of work and re-work under a lot of really
tight deadlines to make things work.

So, Blase, what do you and Roger think about the relative merits of Polish
beer vs. Norwegian beer? :-)

Dave

On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 20:22:26 +0200, Błażej Mazur <> wrote:
> Yes, I was rather overwhelmed by the sheer amount of data published for
> Traveller. And bear in mind, that Poland in the early 90s was not a
place
> where you could find things you wanted just like that. It was time
before
> ebay; well, I remember that in 1994 there was 1 (one) private computer
> with internet connection in my town of 70,000.
>
> Right now I have 3 shelves of Traveller books from different editions
> and when I showed them to my new group they said something along the
> lines of: “there must be more information to remember in those books
> that in Encyclopaedia Britannica”, and “instead of reading this get a
> life”.
>
> But to me the richness of the background makes it now the biggest
> advantage of TNE over the other editions. Even if some players get their
> hands on something from CT I can just use what I like and say, that due
> to Collapse your data on this system is slightly outdated.
>
> And as for the errata, GDW did something that some companies still have
> to learn. You valued your customers. And just for the fact that GDW had
> published for 22 years with one book, game or supplement every 22 days
on
> average (taken from FFE’s website) and your stories how certain things
> had to be put together in a day or two before they were sent to
printers,
> one should be grateful that you commit to making a mistake and try to
fix
> it.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Blase
>
> p.s. If you’re in Germany, or anywhere in Europe for that matter, feel
> free to come over. I owe you at least a pint of good Polish beer, and a
> tour of the places you wrote about in T2K
>
> FROM:
> [] ON BEHALF OF
> SENT: Sunday, June 10, 2012 7:40 PM
> TO:
> SUBJECT: RE: [Traveller_TNE] Question for the group
>
> Thanks Blase. Your message made me laugh out loud at one point.
>
> I think it's really cool that, with all of the T2K stuff we did in
> Poland
> (which to the American players was just one more place they'd never
> visit),
> that it actually allowed you guys to play in your own back yard.
>
> One thing you said that really piques my interest is, " Since we have
> started playing Traveller less than 20 years ago (which makes me a
> youngster in Traveller community), our main concern was the overwhelming
> depth of materials published for Traveller over the previous 15 years. "
>
> So would you say that you were one of the people that DID find the
> Imperial Traveller background intimidating or off-putting? Because as
> I've
> said, we did a lot of things to deliberately address that perception,
> but
> I'm curious to hear from someone who might say, "Yes, I was definitely
> one
> of those guys, and here's how it felt."
>
> On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 17:54:21 +0200, Błażej Mazur wrote:
>> So here’s my point of view.
>>
>> Since we have started playing Traveller less than 20 years ago (which
>> makes me a youngster in Traveller community), our main concern was the
>> overwhelming depth of materials published for Traveller over the
> previous
>> 15 years. TNE gave new players a great opportunity to jump right into
>> this game without the need to look for hundreds of supplements. You
> could
>> just start an RC campaign with your character’s knowledge very
> similar
>> to your knowledge of what’s happening outside.
>>
>> Also, I have always envisioned RC setting as very similar to T:2000.
>> There’s been a war, you have no idea who’s still out there and
>> who’s not, and you’re pretty much on your own. (As a side note I
>> should point out, that in T2k we didn’t play the American remnants
> of
>> the 5th Div, but chose Polish 1st Free Legion from Leszno, which is 50
> km
>> (30mi) from where I actually live now. Their main goal was to survive
>> first, and after that you can try to rebuild some sort of civilization
>> – sounds familiar?)
>>
>> For those who longed and pined for the Imperium there was always
>> Regency. So when we finally got our hands on some Traveller resources
>> from previous editions, we started a Regency campaign.
>>
>> What could you do with MT? Over the years I’ve heard that all
>> materials for MT where in desperate need of errata, so, from
> publishing
>> point of view I think, that a fresh start was something that was
> needed.
>
>>
>> Probably the most controversial issue was the Virus, but you already
>> know this from the wars on the Internet and names you’ve been called
> by
>> some people. To me Virus is not as inconceivable as some say. Given
> the
>> data you had on Cymbeline chips, the need for a force that could put
> an
>> end to the war (in one way or the other) is plausible at least.
> Besides,
>> knowing how technology and computers have changed over the past 20
> years
>> I say you were right. And all those people who couldn’t suspend
> their
>> disbelief for Virus, yet still believed in Cat-samurai, psionics and
>> wolfs in space can go f…ishing.
>>
>> As stated in PoT, the Virus is not what runs the Traveller Universe.
>> “Finally, and most importantly, avoid filling your campaign with
> Virus.
>> The effects of Virus are omnipresent, but the actual reality of Virus
>> should be very rare…” PoT p.143
>>
>> The “Shower incident” is what GT did to Traveller. If I were an MT
>> player or referee I would most probably feel at least a little
> offended
>> if you said: “Hey guys, you remember the last couple of years worth
> of
>> books? Well, it didn’t happen.”
>>
>> All in all, you made a good and reasonable decision to move Traveller
>> forwards.
>>
>
>
>

I am not much into beer, I am more of a single malt whisky kind a guy =0)
Preferably scottish. I got about 17 bottles here at home. And I try to buy more every time I am abroad.
But I’ll gladly serve you Norwegian beer if you like. We also have something called Linie Aquavitt which has a interesting story, which you’ll have to wait for until you come to Norway.

But for the fun of it I would like to try a few Polish ones.

From:
Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2012 9:17 PM
To:
Subject: RE: [Traveller_TNE] Question for the group

So, Blase, what do you and Roger think about the relative merits of Polish
beer vs. Norwegian beer? :-)

--
Roger Malmstein
www.travellerfreeport.com

Well, I like my players to have at least basic understanding of the world they’re playing in, so I don’t have to explain every little thing to them. The basics covered in the Rulebook, and the essays on the Coalition, its people and politics from PoT really helped me in introducing Traveller to them.

The politics of Coalition is something I wanted to ask about. We have those Centrists and Federalists which give us a wide range of political intrigue to play with. I don’t know if you’re aware, that The Backwards Mask was published through FFE on dtrpg.com. I had the privilege of reviewing them. Them, because there are two versions – the original by Paul Brunette, and a new by Matt Carson. In the latter, Matt explores the differences and divisions between those two parties to a point of a betrayal of the Coalition by some high-ranking officials from one of those parties. My question is: Were there any plans to dig deeper into that kind of matter, or it was just to put some depth to Coalition.

And WE are even more glad that we are in NATO. (But it doesn’t change the fact, that we wouldn’t pull a Red Dawn type of attack on you guys)(I think).

I’ve been to Norway on my honeymoon and we drove from Narvik to Stavanger, but Norwegian brands I seem to recall are only Hansa and CB. Perhaps Roger could enlighten us on that topic. Another thing worth trying (but in moderation) is Akvavit, Norwegian caraway vodka. I still have a bottle of it in my cocktail cabinet.

If Roger insists we could meet on his ground, or somewhere in between. I live 2-hour drive from Berlin.

From: [] On Behalf Of
Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2012 9:18 PM
To:
Subject: RE: [Traveller_TNE] Question for the group

Blase--

Thank you very much for that, and you made me laugh out loud again.

By the way, I'm glad you guys are in NATO now, and not the Warsaw Pact.

That's an interesting reaction from your players, and one that reminds me
that we weren't being completely stupid when we tried to simplify the game
for newcomers. The funny thing is, my Traveller players never felt like
they had to learn anything about the game background. As the GM, they just
expected I would let them know what they needed to know, and I guess I was
cooperative. Of course my campaign wasn't in the Imperium anyway.

Actually, I didn't really put Hard Times together in a day, it took a lot
longer than that. But that was the date on the schedule when I got there.
But yes, we did have to do a lot of work and re-work under a lot of really
tight deadlines to make things work.

So, Blase, what do you and Roger think about the relative merits of Polish
beer vs. Norwegian beer? :-)

Dave

On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 20:22:26 +0200, Błażej Mazur < <blase2%

I would love to be your host here in Norway for a weekend or so. Our spare bedroom got a two story bed, so you’ll sleep like in a naval sheep. The least heavy dude sleeps in the upper bunk =0)

Just give me a heads up at I’ll see to that we get an interesting time =0)
--
Roger Malmstein
www.travellerfreeport.com

From: Błażej Mazur
Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2012 10:06 PM
To:
Subject: RE: [Traveller_TNE] Question for the group

If Roger insists we could meet on his ground, or somewhere in between. I live 2-hour drive from Berlin.

So the Paul Brunette MS did exist? I was just having a discussion about
that with Wayne's Books, and I didn't know. He did explain to me that Marc
pulled in a new author to write the third installment, which I thought was
sad. It would have been nice had Paul been able to finish his series. I
did
talk to Paul a couple of times when I was working for the Army at Fort
Knox. The printer we used wanted to finish up the series, even though GDW
was done by then. The story was going to do with the loss of one of SecGen
Maggart's daughters on a mission, and the crew of the Hornet was looking
for them. Since Maggart and his daughters were based on real people, Paul
had some detail questions for me. I regret to say that my last
conversation with him took place under less-than-ideal circumstances. I was
running late for a meeting with the Armor School Doctrine Division (I did
the electronic staffing, publication, and distribution of their stuff), and
was driving and trying to call them on my cell phone to tell them I was
running late, and my battery was dying. At that moment Paul called me. My
response, "I don't have time, my battery is dying, I have to call someone
for my real job," was rather more stressed and rushed and irritable than
polite. That was the last time I spoke with him (for some reason I could
not recover the number to call him back, maybe cell phones didn't do that
well back in 1996), and I still regret the way that happened.

The intent behind the factions was to add depth, rather than to set up a
planned plot device. But the thing about details like that is that
sometimes they take on a life of their own and get bigger than you
originally thought. And that's a good thing.

There was a funny story shortly after Poland joined PfP or NATO in the
'90s, about German force deployment, how it was going to be deployed vs.
the Russians now that an ally was on their Eastern border instead of a
WarPac nation. Their response was something like, "Naah, we're going to
leave them where they are. If we have to, we'll just charge right across
Poland to fight the Russians on Polish soil." Those Germans, looking for an
excuse to invade Poland again.

On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 22:06:38 +0200, Błażej Mazur <> wrote:
> Well, I like my players to have at least basic understanding of the
> world they’re playing in, so I don’t have to explain every little
> thing to them. The basics covered in the Rulebook, and the essays on the
> Coalition, its people and politics from PoT really helped me in
> introducing Traveller to them.
>
> The politics of Coalition is something I wanted to ask about. We have
> those Centrists and Federalists which give us a wide range of political
> intrigue to play with. I don’t know if you’re aware, that The
> Backwards Mask was published through FFE on dtrpg.com. I had the
> privilege of reviewing them. Them, because there are two versions – the
> original by Paul Brunette, and a new by Matt Carson. In the latter, Matt
> explores the differences and divisions between those two parties to a
> point of a betrayal of the Coalition by some high-ranking officials from
> one of those parties. My question is: Were there any plans to dig deeper
> into that kind of matter, or it was just to put some depth to Coalition.
>
> And WE are even more glad that we are in NATO. (But it doesn’t change
> the fact, that we wouldn’t pull a Red Dawn type of attack on you
> guys)(I think).
>
> I’ve been to Norway on my honeymoon and we drove from Narvik to
> Stavanger, but Norwegian brands I seem to recall are only Hansa and CB.
> Perhaps Roger could enlighten us on that topic. Another thing worth
> trying (but in moderation) is Akvavit, Norwegian caraway vodka. I still
> have a bottle of it in my cocktail cabinet.
>
> If Roger insists we could meet on his ground, or somewhere in between. I
> live 2-hour drive from Berlin.
>
> FROM:
> [] ON BEHALF OF
> SENT: Sunday, June 10, 2012 9:18 PM
> TO:
> SUBJECT: RE: [Traveller_TNE] Question for the group
>
> Blase--
>
> Thank you very much for that, and you made me laugh out loud again.
>
> By the way, I'm glad you guys are in NATO now, and not the Warsaw Pact.
>
> That's an interesting reaction from your players, and one that reminds
> me
> that we weren't being completely stupid when we tried to simplify the
> game
> for newcomers. The funny thing is, my Traveller players never felt like
> they had to learn anything about the game background. As the GM, they
> just
> expected I would let them know what they needed to know, and I guess I
> was
> cooperative. Of course my campaign wasn't in the Imperium anyway.
>
> Actually, I didn't really put Hard Times together in a day, it took a
> lot
> longer than that. But that was the date on the schedule when I got
> there.
> But yes, we did have to do a lot of work and re-work under a lot of
> really
> tight deadlines to make things work.
>
> So, Blase, what do you and Roger think about the relative merits of
> Polish
> beer vs. Norwegian beer? :-)
>
> Dave
>
> On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 20:22:26 +0200, Błażej Mazur wrote:
>> Yes, I was rather overwhelmed by the sheer amount of data published
> for
>> Traveller. And bear in mind, that Poland in the early 90s was not a
> place
>> where you could find things you wanted just like that. It was time
> before
>> ebay; well, I remember that in 1994 there was 1 (one) private computer
>> with internet connection in my town of 70,000.
>>
>> Right now I have 3 shelves of Traveller books from different editions
>> and when I showed them to my new group they said something along the
>> lines of: “there must be more information to remember in those books
>> that in Encyclopaedia Britannica”, and “instead of reading this
> get a
>> life”.
>>
>> But to me the richness of the background makes it now the biggest
>> advantage of TNE over the other editions. Even if some players get
> their
>> hands on something from CT I can just use what I like and say, that
> due
>> to Collapse your data on this system is slightly outdated.
>>
>> And as for the errata, GDW did something that some companies still
> have
>> to learn. You valued your customers. And just for the fact that GDW
> had
>> published for 22 years with one book, game or supplement every 22 days
> on
>> average (taken from FFE’s website) and your stories how certain
> things
>> had to be put together in a day or two before they were sent to
> printers,
>> one should be grateful that you commit to making a mistake and try to
> fix
>> it.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Blase
>>
>> p.s. If you’re in Germany, or anywhere in Europe for that matter,
> feel
>> free to come over. I owe you at least a pint of good Polish beer, and
> a
>> tour of the places you wrote about in T2K
>>
>> FROM: [2]
>> [ [3]] ON BEHALF OF
> [4]
>> SENT: Sunday, June 10, 2012 7:40 PM
>> TO: [5]
>> SUBJECT: RE: [Traveller_TNE] Question for the group
>>
>> Thanks Blase. Your message made me laugh out loud at one point.
>>
>> I think it's really cool that, with all of the T2K stuff we did in
>> Poland
>> (which to the American players was just one more place they'd never
>> visit),
>> that it actually allowed you guys to play in your own back yard.
>>
>> One thing you said that really piques my interest is, " Since we have
>> started playing Traveller less than 20 years ago (which makes me a
>> youngster in Traveller community), our main concern was the
> overwhelming
>> depth of materials published for Traveller over the previous 15 years.
> "
>>
>> So would you say that you were one of the people that DID find the
>> Imperial Traveller background intimidating or off-putting? Because as
>> I've
>> said, we did a lot of things to deliberately address that perception,
>> but
>> I'm curious to hear from someone who might say, "Yes, I was definitely
>> one
>> of those guys, and here's how it felt."
>>
>> On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 17:54:21 +0200, Błażej Mazur wrote:
>>> So here’s my point of view.
>>>
>>> Since we have started playing Traveller less than 20 years ago (which
>>> makes me a youngster in Traveller community), our main concern was
> the
>>> overwhelming depth of materials published for Traveller over the
>> previous
>>> 15 years. TNE gave new players a great opportunity to jump right into
>>> this game without the need to look for hundreds of supplements. You
>> could
>>> just start an RC campaign with your character’s knowledge very
>> similar
>>> to your knowledge of what’s happening outside.
>>>
>>> Also, I have always envisioned RC setting as very similar to T:2000.
>>> There’s been a war, you have no idea who’s still out there and
>>> who’s not, and you’re pretty much on your own. (As a side note I
>>> should point out, that in T2k we didn’t play the American remnants
>> of
>>> the 5th Div, but chose Polish 1st Free Legion from Leszno, which is
> 50
>> km
>>> (30mi) from where I actually live now. Their main goal was to survive
>>> first, and after that you can try to rebuild some sort of
> civilization
>>> – sounds familiar?)
>>>
>>> For those who longed and pined for the Imperium there was always
>>> Regency. So when we finally got our hands on some Traveller resources
>>> from previous editions, we started a Regency campaign.
>>>
>>> What could you do with MT? Over the years I’ve heard that all
>>> materials for MT where in desperate need of errata, so, from
>> publishing
>>> point of view I think, that a fresh start was something that was
>> needed.
>>
>>>
>>> Probably the most controversial issue was the Virus, but you already
>>> know this from the wars on the Internet and names you’ve been
> called
>> by
>>> some people. To me Virus is not as inconceivable as some say. Given
>> the
>>> data you had on Cymbeline chips, the need for a force that could put
>> an
>>> end to the war (in one way or the other) is plausible at least.
>> Besides,
>>> knowing how technology and computers have changed over the past 20
>> years
>>> I say you were right. And all those people who couldn’t suspend
>> their
>>> disbelief for Virus, yet still believed in Cat-samurai, psionics and
>>> wolfs in space can go f…ishing.
>>>
>>> As stated in PoT, the Virus is not what runs the Traveller Universe.
>>> “Finally, and most importantly, avoid filling your campaign with
>> Virus.
>>> The effects of Virus are omnipresent, but the actual reality of Virus
>>> should be very rare…” PoT p.143
>>>
>>> The “Shower incident” is what GT did to Traveller. If I were an
> MT
>>> player or referee I would most probably feel at least a little
>> offended
>>> if you said: “Hey guys, you remember the last couple of years worth
>> of
>>> books? Well, it didn’t happen.”
>>>
>>> All in all, you made a good and reasonable decision to move Traveller
>>> forwards.
>>>
>>
>>
>>

I promise, if it seems like it could happen I will let you know!

> I would love to be your host here in Norway for a weekend or so. Our spare
> bedroom got a two story bed, so you’ll sleep like in a naval sheep. The
> least heavy dude sleeps in the upper bunk =0)
>
> Just give me a heads up at I’ll see to that we get an interesting time
> =0)
> --
> Roger Malmstein
> www.travellerfreeport.com
>
>
> From: Błażej Mazur
> Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2012 10:06 PM
> To:
> Subject: RE: [Traveller_TNE] Question for the group
>
> If Roger insists we could meet on his ground, or somewhere in between. I
> live 2-hour drive from Berlin.
>
>

I’ve heard the story already, but I suspect every tourist visiting Norway has to try it and take one bottle home. Either Akvavit or a fjord, not sure about it, but in my understanding you Norwegians are rather attached to your fjords. Or they are to you? Never mind.

On a different note, if you ever come to Poland DO NOT, UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE buy Polish whiskey. We may know how to make vodka, hell, we invented vodka, but when it comes to whiskey we just don’t get it.

Anyway, you are more than welcome to drop by and I should be able to arrange a tour of some kind (cultural, architectural, historical, or just pub-style).

Cheers,

Blase

From: [] On Behalf Of Roger Malmstein
Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2012 10:05 PM
To:
Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Question for the group

I am not much into beer, I am more of a single malt whisky kind a guy =0)

Preferably scottish. I got about 17 bottles here at home. And I try to buy more every time I am abroad.

But I’ll gladly serve you Norwegian beer if you like. We also have something called Linie Aquavitt which has a interesting story, which you’ll have to wait for until you come to Norway.

But for the fun of it I would like to try a few Polish ones.

From:

Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2012 9:17 PM

To:

Subject: RE: [Traveller_TNE] Question for the group

So, Blase, what do you and Roger think about the relative merits of Polish
beer vs. Norwegian beer? :-)

--
Roger Malmstein
www.travellerfreeport.com

On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 9:23 AM, <> wrote:

> Thanks, Evyn.
>
> What do you mean by, "reference Hard Times a little more stridently"?
>

Meaning that in the Backstory it should have been a little clearer that
worlds were failing before the release of the Virus. A lot of people make
the jump to Virus as cause for the collapse instead of it being the final
Knockout punch for the fragments of Imperium.

--
Evyn

Ohhhh, that's a good point.

I was so close to it that I obviously knew it was already there.

I think "Hard Times" is one of the higher-rated late MT products on some
scale I saw somewhere, maybe FFE. That didn't follow logically, it just
popped into my head.

> On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 9:23 AM, <> wrote:
>
>> Thanks, Evyn.
>>
>> What do you mean by, "reference Hard Times a little more stridently"?
>>
>
> Meaning that in the Backstory it should have been a little clearer that
> worlds were failing before the release of the Virus. A lot of people make
> the jump to Virus as cause for the collapse instead of it being the final
> Knockout punch for the fragments of Imperium.
>
>
> --
> Evyn
>

They are both available on dtrpg. There were 3 people reviewing them and my personal opinion is that our reviews were inconclusive, so Marc decided to put them both for sale. As far as I can recall both were quite decent when it comes to RPG fiction, and our job was to look for contradictions to previously published material, and overall evaluation.

The politics is something that interested me as a player and referee, so when I introduced my group to TNE I took the liberty to translate some parts of PoT (hope it doesn’t cause infringement on copyrights of any kind) for my players, and they pointed me to that direction as a possible plot for some adventures.

As for the German forces in Poland, we allow them to use our armour training grounds (for a small fee) and that would be all. There is still a strong mistrust to any foreign troops stationing in Poland, to a point that, when the US suggested installing Anti Ballistic System in Poland we had strong voices against.

From: [] On Behalf Of
Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2012 10:31 PM
To:
Subject: RE: [Traveller_TNE] Question for the group

So the Paul Brunette MS did exist? I was just having a discussion about
that with Wayne's Books, and I didn't know. He did explain to me that Marc
pulled in a new author to write the third installment, which I thought was
sad. It would have been nice had Paul been able to finish his series. I
did
talk to Paul a couple of times when I was working for the Army at Fort
Knox. The printer we used wanted to finish up the series, even though GDW
was done by then. The story was going to do with the loss of one of SecGen
Maggart's daughters on a mission, and the crew of the Hornet was looking
for them. Since Maggart and his daughters were based on real people, Paul
had some detail questions for me. I regret to say that my last
conversation with him took place under less-than-ideal circumstances. I was
running late for a meeting with the Armor School Doctrine Division (I did
the electronic staffing, publication, and distribution of their stuff), and
was driving and trying to call them on my cell phone to tell them I was
running late, and my battery was dying. At that moment Paul called me. My
response, "I don't have time, my battery is dying, I have to call someone
for my real job," was rather more stressed and rushed and irritable than
polite. That was the last time I spoke with him (for some reason I could
not recover the number to call him back, maybe cell phones didn't do that
well back in 1996), and I still regret the way that happened.

The intent behind the factions was to add depth, rather than to set up a
planned plot device. But the thing about details like that is that
sometimes they take on a life of their own and get bigger than you
originally thought. And that's a good thing.

There was a funny story shortly after Poland joined PfP or NATO in the
'90s, about German force deployment, how it was going to be deployed vs.
the Russians now that an ally was on their Eastern border instead of a
WarPac nation. Their response was something like, "Naah, we're going to
leave them where they are. If we have to, we'll just charge right across
Poland to fight the Russians on Polish soil." Those Germans, looking for an
excuse to invade Poland again.

On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 22:06:38 +0200, Błażej Mazur < <blase2%

Did Paul's version deal with Maggart's daughter? And did Coeur and her XO
ever get together? I made him take that out of the first book.

I think the politics thing sounds intriguing.

The Poles have every right to keep their country to themselves for a change.

> They are both available on dtrpg. There were 3 people reviewing them and
> my personal opinion is that our reviews were inconclusive, so Marc decided
> to put them both for sale. As far as I can recall both were quite decent
> when it comes to RPG fiction, and our job was to look for contradictions
> to previously published material, and overall evaluation.
>
> The politics is something that interested me as a player and referee, so
> when I introduced my group to TNE I took the liberty to translate some
> parts of PoT (hope it doesn’t cause infringement on copyrights of any
> kind) for my players, and they pointed me to that direction as a possible
> plot for some adventures.
>
> As for the German forces in Poland, we allow them to use our armour
> training grounds (for a small fee) and that would be all. There is still a
> strong mistrust to any foreign troops stationing in Poland, to a point
> that, when the US suggested installing Anti Ballistic System in Poland we
> had strong voices against.
>
>
>
> From: []
> On Behalf Of
> Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2012 10:31 PM
> To:
> Subject: RE: [Traveller_TNE] Question for the group
>
>
>
>
>
> So the Paul Brunette MS did exist? I was just having a discussion about
> that with Wayne's Books, and I didn't know. He did explain to me that Marc
> pulled in a new author to write the third installment, which I thought was
> sad. It would have been nice had Paul been able to finish his series. I
> did
> talk to Paul a couple of times when I was working for the Army at Fort
> Knox. The printer we used wanted to finish up the series, even though GDW
> was done by then. The story was going to do with the loss of one of SecGen
> Maggart's daughters on a mission, and the crew of the Hornet was looking
> for them. Since Maggart and his daughters were based on real people, Paul
> had some detail questions for me. I regret to say that my last
> conversation with him took place under less-than-ideal circumstances. I
> was
> running late for a meeting with the Armor School Doctrine Division (I did
> the electronic staffing, publication, and distribution of their stuff),
> and
> was driving and trying to call them on my cell phone to tell them I was
> running late, and my battery was dying. At that moment Paul called me. My
> response, "I don't have time, my battery is dying, I have to call someone
> for my real job," was rather more stressed and rushed and irritable than
> polite. That was the last time I spoke with him (for some reason I could
> not recover the number to call him back, maybe cell phones didn't do that
> well back in 1996), and I still regret the way that happened.
>
> The intent behind the factions was to add depth, rather than to set up a
> planned plot device. But the thing about details like that is that
> sometimes they take on a life of their own and get bigger than you
> originally thought. And that's a good thing.
>
> There was a funny story shortly after Poland joined PfP or NATO in the
> '90s, about German force deployment, how it was going to be deployed vs.
> the Russians now that an ally was on their Eastern border instead of a
> WarPac nation. Their response was something like, "Naah, we're going to
> leave them where they are. If we have to, we'll just charge right across
> Poland to fight the Russians on Polish soil." Those Germans, looking for
> an
> excuse to invade Poland again.
>
> On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 22:06:38 +0200, Błażej Mazur <
> <blase2%

Oh, and re: copyright infringement, I would believe that to be a perfect
example of "fair use."

> They are both available on dtrpg. There were 3 people reviewing them and
> my personal opinion is that our reviews were inconclusive, so Marc decided
> to put them both for sale. As far as I can recall both were quite decent
> when it comes to RPG fiction, and our job was to look for contradictions
> to previously published material, and overall evaluation.
>
> The politics is something that interested me as a player and referee, so
> when I introduced my group to TNE I took the liberty to translate some
> parts of PoT (hope it doesn’t cause infringement on copyrights of any
> kind) for my players, and they pointed me to that direction as a possible
> plot for some adventures.
>
> As for the German forces in Poland, we allow them to use our armour
> training grounds (for a small fee) and that would be all. There is still a
> strong mistrust to any foreign troops stationing in Poland, to a point
> that, when the US suggested installing Anti Ballistic System in Poland we
> had strong voices against.
>
>
>
> From: []
> On Behalf Of
> Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2012 10:31 PM
> To:
> Subject: RE: [Traveller_TNE] Question for the group
>
>
>
>
>
> So the Paul Brunette MS did exist? I was just having a discussion about
> that with Wayne's Books, and I didn't know. He did explain to me that Marc
> pulled in a new author to write the third installment, which I thought was
> sad. It would have been nice had Paul been able to finish his series. I
> did
> talk to Paul a couple of times when I was working for the Army at Fort
> Knox. The printer we used wanted to finish up the series, even though GDW
> was done by then. The story was going to do with the loss of one of SecGen
> Maggart's daughters on a mission, and the crew of the Hornet was looking
> for them. Since Maggart and his daughters were based on real people, Paul
> had some detail questions for me. I regret to say that my last
> conversation with him took place under less-than-ideal circumstances. I
> was
> running late for a meeting with the Armor School Doctrine Division (I did
> the electronic staffing, publication, and distribution of their stuff),
> and
> was driving and trying to call them on my cell phone to tell them I was
> running late, and my battery was dying. At that moment Paul called me. My
> response, "I don't have time, my battery is dying, I have to call someone
> for my real job," was rather more stressed and rushed and irritable than
> polite. That was the last time I spoke with him (for some reason I could
> not recover the number to call him back, maybe cell phones didn't do that
> well back in 1996), and I still regret the way that happened.
>
> The intent behind the factions was to add depth, rather than to set up a
> planned plot device. But the thing about details like that is that
> sometimes they take on a life of their own and get bigger than you
> originally thought. And that's a good thing.
>
> There was a funny story shortly after Poland joined PfP or NATO in the
> '90s, about German force deployment, how it was going to be deployed vs.
> the Russians now that an ally was on their Eastern border instead of a
> WarPac nation. Their response was something like, "Naah, we're going to
> leave them where they are. If we have to, we'll just charge right across
> Poland to fight the Russians on Polish soil." Those Germans, looking for
> an
> excuse to invade Poland again.
>
> On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 22:06:38 +0200, Błażej Mazur <
> <blase2%

On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 2:51 PM, <> wrote:

> Did Paul's version deal with Maggart's daughter? And did Coeur and her XO
> ever get together? I made him take that out of the first book.
>
> I think the politics thing sounds intriguing.
>
> The Poles have every right to keep their country to themselves for a
> change.

With all this Talk about Poland has me seriously thinking back to my
service in the middle 80's, While I were on a WestPac the 2 most popular
RPGs being run on our ship were Traveller and Twilight2000. Yes, a bunch of
Sailors and Marines role playing a bunch of Army and Air Force guys in post
collapse Poland (a distant and strange theatre of operation).
--
Evyn

What ship(s) were you on?

Based on our mail, T2K was very popular in the armed forces. We got a lot
of suggestions for the game from them, based on their experiences.

> On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 2:51 PM, <> wrote:
>
>> Did Paul's version deal with Maggart's daughter? And did Coeur and her
>> XO
>> ever get together? I made him take that out of the first book.
>>
>> I think the politics thing sounds intriguing.
>>
>> The Poles have every right to keep their country to themselves for a
>> change.
>
>
> With all this Talk about Poland has me seriously thinking back to my
> service in the middle 80's, While I were on a WestPac the 2 most popular
> RPGs being run on our ship were Traveller and Twilight2000. Yes, a bunch
> of
> Sailors and Marines role playing a bunch of Army and Air Force guys in
> post
> collapse Poland (a distant and strange theatre of operation).
> --
> Evyn
>

On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 3:11 PM, <> wrote:

> What ship(s) were you on?
>

That Particular cruise the USS Constellation CV64.

> Based on our mail, T2K was very popular in the armed forces. We got a lot
> of suggestions for the game from them, based on their experiences.
>
>
> > On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 2:51 PM, <> wrote:
> >
> >> Did Paul's version deal with Maggart's daughter? And did Coeur and her
> >> XO
> >> ever get together? I made him take that out of the first book.
> >>
> >> I think the politics thing sounds intriguing.
> >>
> >> The Poles have every right to keep their country to themselves for a
> >> change.
> >
> >
> > With all this Talk about Poland has me seriously thinking back to my
> > service in the middle 80's, While I were on a WestPac the 2 most popular
> > RPGs being run on our ship were Traveller and Twilight2000. Yes, a bunch
> > of
> > Sailors and Marines role playing a bunch of Army and Air Force guys in
> > post
> > collapse Poland (a distant and strange theatre of operation).
> > --
> > Evyn
> >
>

--
Evyn

That's the name of one of my dogs, including the USS and the CV 64, but
she comes to "Connie" of course.

I picked up a nice 1:700 mahogany model of her last year on sale. Saw her
in Bremerton a couple years back as well, with all kinds of gear stacked
on her flight deck. Ranger, Connie, Indy, all in a row.

> On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 3:11 PM, <> wrote:
>
>> What ship(s) were you on?
>>
>
> That Particular cruise the USS Constellation CV64.
>
>
>> Based on our mail, T2K was very popular in the armed forces. We got a
>> lot
>> of suggestions for the game from them, based on their experiences.
>>
>>
>> > On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 2:51 PM, <> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Did Paul's version deal with Maggart's daughter? And did Coeur and
>> her
>> >> XO
>> >> ever get together? I made him take that out of the first book.
>> >>
>> >> I think the politics thing sounds intriguing.
>> >>
>> >> The Poles have every right to keep their country to themselves for a
>> >> change.
>> >
>> >
>> > With all this Talk about Poland has me seriously thinking back to my
>> > service in the middle 80's, While I were on a WestPac the 2 most
>> popular
>> > RPGs being run on our ship were Traveller and Twilight2000. Yes, a
>> bunch
>> > of
>> > Sailors and Marines role playing a bunch of Army and Air Force guys in
>> > post
>> > collapse Poland (a distant and strange theatre of operation).
>> > --
>> > Evyn
>> >
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Evyn
>

On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 3:23 PM, <> wrote:

> That's the name of one of my dogs, including the USS and the CV 64, but
> she comes to "Connie" of course.

Poor Dog.... 8-)

> Ranger, Connie, Indy, all in a row.

Wow, I can remember all three tied up at the Dock at NAS North Island in
active service. Does that make me old?
--
Evyn

It wasn’t about the daughter. It was about a cluster of 3 imperial research planets which Coeur found out about and went to investigate. As for the relationship I don’t remember now, but will check it and let you know.

All right. It’s nearly 1a.m. here, so I’ll better go to bed if I don’t want to play zombie tomorrow at work. It’s been a fun day with all you guys remembering stuff from ancient history.

Thank you and good night,

Blase

"IMPORTANT: This e-mail is intended for the use of the individual addressee's named above and may contain information that is confidential privileged or unsuitable for overly sensitive persons with low self-esteem, no sense of humour or irrational religious beliefs. If you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail is not authorised (either explicitly or implicitly) and constitutes an irritating social faux pas. Unless the word absquatulation has been used in its correct context somewhere other than in this warning, it does not have any legal or grammatical use and may be ignored. No animals were harmed in the transmission of this e-mail, although the kelpie next door is living on borrowed time, let me tell you. Those of you with an overwhelming fear of the unknown will be gratified to learn that there is no hidden message revealed by reading this warning backwards, so just ignore that Alert Notice from Microsoft. However, by pouring a complete circle of salt around yourself and your computer you can ensure that no harm befalls you and your pets. If you have received this e-mail in error, please add some nutmeg and egg whites, whisk and place in a warm oven for 40 minutes."

From: [] On Behalf Of
Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2012 11:51 PM
To:
Subject: RE: [Traveller_TNE] Question for the group

Did Paul's version deal with Maggart's daughter? And did Coeur and her XO
ever get together? I made him take that out of the first book.

I think the politics thing sounds intriguing.

The Poles have every right to keep their country to themselves for a change.

> They are both available on dtrpg. There were 3 people reviewing them and
> my personal opinion is that our reviews were inconclusive, so Marc decided
> to put them both for sale. As far as I can recall both were quite decent
> when it comes to RPG fiction, and our job was to look for contradictions
> to previously published material, and overall evaluation.
>
> The politics is something that interested me as a player and referee, so
> when I introduced my group to TNE I took the liberty to translate some
> parts of PoT (hope it doesn’t cause infringement on copyrights of any
> kind) for my players, and they pointed me to that direction as a possible
> plot for some adventures.
>
> As for the German forces in Poland, we allow them to use our armour
> training grounds (for a small fee) and that would be all. There is still a
> strong mistrust to any foreign troops stationing in Poland, to a point
> that, when the US suggested installing Anti Ballistic System in Poland we
> had strong voices against.
>
>

> Poor Dog.... 8-)

It's a proud name. "America's Flagship."

Were you with her when Reagan came aboard and gave her that?

> On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 3:23 PM, <> wrote:
>
>> That's the name of one of my dogs, including the USS and the CV 64, but
>> she comes to "Connie" of course.
>
>
> Poor Dog.... 8-)
>
>
>> Ranger, Connie, Indy, all in a row.
>
>
> Wow, I can remember all three tied up at the Dock at NAS North Island in
> active service. Does that make me old?
> --
> Evyn
>

On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 4:17 PM, <> wrote:

> > Poor Dog.... 8-)
>
> It's a proud name. "America's Flagship."
>
> Were you with her when Reagan came aboard and gave her that?

Just missed that. She was a grand Ship, but like all things
known intimately the Flaws of reality get in the way. Some of my fondest
moments aboard her where polishing up her livery for receiving guests. And
painting the Anchor Gold.....

Would Love to see her Name live on in the form of a New Carrier. Alongside
the Names of the other Grand Ladies of the Cold War age. But that is the
opinion of an aging Coxswain/Boatswain's Mate who looked up at those grand
ships with all the awe that they could inspire from the wheel of my own
small commands....
--
Evyn

I understand how maintaining 80,000 tons of 20-30-40 year old steel takes
some of the mystique away.

Yeah, sadly, all the great carrier names are being discarded in favor of
politicians in the same party as the current administration. And they
don't wait until people are dead anymore.

Independence is now an LCS, and LCSs are named after any old thing anyone
can think of.

America is being degraded to an LHD, and all of the great old Essex-class
names have been degraded to LHDs or CGs.

I know I'd rather serve aboard a Constellation, Saratoga, Ranger, Coral
Sea, Lexington, Kitty Hawk than a Stennis, Vinson, Reagan, Bush, Truman,
or Ford. And JFK is coming back around again, at the expense of a true CV
name. Truman was going to be United States, so that's twice Truman
prevented a CV being named United States.

> On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 4:17 PM, <> wrote:
>
>> > Poor Dog.... 8-)
>>
>> It's a proud name. "America's Flagship."
>>
>> Were you with her when Reagan came aboard and gave her that?
>
>
> Just missed that. She was a grand Ship, but like all things
> known intimately the Flaws of reality get in the way. Some of my fondest
> moments aboard her where polishing up her livery for receiving guests. And
> painting the Anchor Gold.....
>
> Would Love to see her Name live on in the form of a New Carrier. Alongside
> the Names of the other Grand Ladies of the Cold War age. But that is the
> opinion of an aging Coxswain/Boatswain's Mate who looked up at those grand
> ships with all the awe that they could inspire from the wheel of my own
> small commands....
> --
> Evyn
>

It is sad we as a nation have no scene of history and decorum. I am okay with
some vessels being named for people but they should in someway be linked to the
Navy just not anyone one. What happened to the practice of naming ships after
MOH winners? Where is the U.S.S. Basaloine? If anyone deserves a destroyer named
after him it is that guy. Certain names deserve to live on in major ship. But
alas no more.

________________________________
Sent: Sun, June 10, 2012 7:16:56 PM
Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Question for the group

I understand how maintaining 80,000 tons of 20-30-40 year old steel takes
some of the mystique away.

Yeah, sadly, all the great carrier names are being discarded in favor of
politicians in the same party as the current administration. And they
don't wait until people are dead anymore.

Independence is now an LCS, and LCSs are named after any old thing anyone
can think of.

America is being degraded to an LHD, and all of the great old Essex-class
names have been degraded to LHDs or CGs.

I know I'd rather serve aboard a Constellation, Saratoga, Ranger, Coral
Sea, Lexington, Kitty Hawk than a Stennis, Vinson, Reagan, Bush, Truman,
or Ford. And JFK is coming back around again, at the expense of a true CV
name. Truman was going to be United States, so that's twice Truman
prevented a CV being named United States.

> On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 4:17 PM, <> wrote:
>
>> > Poor Dog.... 8-)
>>
>> It's a proud name. "America's Flagship."
>>
>> Were you with her when Reagan came aboard and gave her that?
>
>
> Just missed that. She was a grand Ship, but like all things
> known intimately the Flaws of reality get in the way. Some of my fondest
> moments aboard her where polishing up her livery for receiving guests. And
> painting the Anchor Gold.....
>
> Would Love to see her Name live on in the form of a New Carrier. Alongside
> the Names of the other Grand Ladies of the Cold War age. But that is the
> opinion of an aging Coxswain/Boatswain's Mate who looked up at those grand
> ships with all the awe that they could inspire from the wheel of my own
> small commands....
> --
> Evyn
>

Amen, brother.

It used to be that that for political favors they named ships after the
cities or states of influential congressman, like the CGNs California and
South Carolina (except as cruisers, they should have been cities). That's
okay, I can get along with that, because it's still a larger name that
represents many people. But when Rickover started getting subs named after
congressmen, that was the thin edge of the wedge. "What's a Lipscomb
fish?"

The one I didn't understand was when they named Arleigh Burke after Burke
while he was still alive. Sure, that was a great idea for a DD name, but
as a former CNO, shouldn't he have said, "Hey, stupid, you have to wait
until I'm dead"?

Nimitz was probably dangerous, because it set the stage for Ike, who was a
general who was also a president. TR, Abe, and GW are all historical
names, but living former presidents is just a mess.

Gerald R. Ford is what really blew my mind. He's not even popular among
current Republican thinking, but they had to slap that name on there lest
it get named something like America, or god forbid, Enterprise.

They are still naming DDs after medal of honor winners, but they're
largely recent ones, and there's not enough hulls left to bring back the
names of the old cans like Basilone.

> It is sad we as a nation have no scene of history and decorum. I am okay
> with
> some vessels being named for people but they should in someway be linked
> to the
> Navy just not anyone one. What happened to the practice of naming ships
> after
> MOH winners? Where is the U.S.S. Basaloine? If anyone deserves a destroyer
> named
> after him it is that guy. Certain names deserve to live on in major ship.
> But
> alas no more.
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
Sent: Sun, June 10, 2012 7:16:56 PM
Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Question for the group
>
>
> I understand how maintaining 80,000 tons of 20-30-40 year old steel takes
> some of the mystique away.
>
> Yeah, sadly, all the great carrier names are being discarded in favor of
> politicians in the same party as the current administration. And they
> don't wait until people are dead anymore.
>
> Independence is now an LCS, and LCSs are named after any old thing anyone
> can think of.
>
> America is being degraded to an LHD, and all of the great old Essex-class
> names have been degraded to LHDs or CGs.
>
> I know I'd rather serve aboard a Constellation, Saratoga, Ranger, Coral
> Sea, Lexington, Kitty Hawk than a Stennis, Vinson, Reagan, Bush, Truman,
> or Ford. And JFK is coming back around again, at the expense of a true CV
> name. Truman was going to be United States, so that's twice Truman
> prevented a CV being named United States.
>
>> On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 4:17 PM, <> wrote:
>>
>>> > Poor Dog.... 8-)
>>>
>>> It's a proud name. "America's Flagship."
>>>
>>> Were you with her when Reagan came aboard and gave her that?
>>
>>
>> Just missed that. She was a grand Ship, but like all things
>> known intimately the Flaws of reality get in the way. Some of my fondest
>> moments aboard her where polishing up her livery for receiving guests.
>> And
>> painting the Anchor Gold.....
>>
>> Would Love to see her Name live on in the form of a New Carrier.
>> Alongside
>> the Names of the other Grand Ladies of the Cold War age. But that is the
>> opinion of an aging Coxswain/Boatswain's Mate who looked up at those
>> grand
>> ships with all the awe that they could inspire from the wheel of my own
>> small commands....
>> --
>> Evyn
>>
>
>
>

No problem with the chatty e-mails Dave, I think I spent too much time in academic surroundings that my circu...neurons can't actually emula...do chatty mails.

Don mentioned that the doc he got the Mod1 errata from was loose paper from GDW, and as it dealt with the Mod0 problem of Wild Govt Codes not having the "Wi" allegance code as a designator, which I found odd, I did some hunting and found this from Joe Heck's Traveller Site (at http://traveller.mu.org/archive/TNE/errata/TNE-Errata.txt):

------------

Aaaahh, yes. NOT "Wilds" allegiance codes as I was thinking, but Wilds
government codes. I remember now we had to do that, but the details elude
me at the moment.

On Thu, 14 Jun 2012 14:38:22 +0100 (BST), Eamon Watters
<> wrote:
> No problem with the chatty e-mails Dave, I think I spent too much time
> in academic surroundings that my circu...neurons can't actually
> emula...do chatty mails.
>
> Don mentioned that the doc he got the Mod1 errata from was loose paper
> from GDW, and as it dealt with the Mod0 problem of Wild Govt Codes not
> having the "Wi" allegance code as a designator, which I found odd, I did
> some hunting and found this from Joe Heck's Traveller Site (at
> http://traveller.mu.org/archive/TNE/errata/TNE-Errata.txt [1]):
>
> ------------

On 13/06/2012 06:01, wrote:
> Oh yeah, and the McKinney consolidated errata PDF is in error. He states
> that no work had started on Regency Starship Guide. That's not true. I was
> partway along in writing it. Nowhere close to a final MS, but there were
> several completed ship designs.

Any chance you could post them, or send them to Jeff @ Freelance to publish?

Best regards,

Ewan
--


"When I go home I will tell of them and say,
For our tomorrow, They gave their today."

My spelling is entirerly due to dyslexia, typos, and poetic license

If I could dig them out of my old Mac, I would. But I checked it several
years ago and it was password protected, and I can't remember the password.
I don't even know if the machine will boot anymore.

On Thu, 14 Jun 2012 17:26:51 +0100, Ewan Quibell <>
wrote:
> On 13/06/2012 06:01, [1] wrote:
> > Oh yeah, and the McKinney consolidated errata PDF is in error. He
> states
> > that no work had started on Regency Starship Guide. That's not true.
> I was
> > partway along in writing it. Nowhere close to a final MS, but there
> were
> > several completed ship designs.
>
> Any chance you could post them, or send them to Jeff @ Freelance to
> publish?
>
> Best regards,
>
> Ewan
> --
> [2]
>
> "When I go home I will tell of them and say,
> For our tomorrow, They gave their today."
>
> My spelling is entirerly due to dyslexia, typos, and poetic license
>
>
>

A pal of mine is a Mac uber-fan. If you can tell me the type of Mac he might be able to think of a work-around.
 
Eamon

From: "" <>
To:
Sent: Friday, 15 June 2012, 10:02
Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Question for the group

 
If I could dig them out of my old Mac, I would. But I checked it several
years ago and it was password protected, and I can't remember the password.
I don't even know if the machine will boot anymore.

On Thu, 14 Jun 2012 17:26:51 +0100, Ewan Quibell <ewan%

It's in the storage unit, so I can't look at it. I think the Mac OS was in
the 6 series. Does that seem right for 1991? It was the OS before the one
that allowed you to have more than one application open at the same time.
It's funny, but it has been standard for so long to have multiple apps
concurrently running that I can't remember the term for it back when it was
a Big Deal.

On Fri, 15 Jun 2012 03:50:48 +0100 (BST), Eamon Watters
<> wrote:
> A pal of mine is a Mac uber-fan. If you can tell me the type of Mac he
> might be able to think of a work-around. Eamon
> ""
>
> Friday, 15 June 2012, 10:02
> Re: [Traveller_TNE] Question for the group
>
> If I could dig them out of my old Mac, I would. But I checked it
> several
> years ago and it was password protected, and I can't remember the
> password.
> I don't even know if the machine will boot anymore.
>
> On Thu, 14 Jun 2012 17:26:51 +0100, Ewan Quibell
> wrote:
>> On 13/06/2012 06:01, [1] wrote:
>> > Oh yeah, and the McKinney consolidated errata PDF is in error. He
>> states
>> > that no work had started on Regency Starship Guide. That's not true.
>> I was
>> > partway along in writing it. Nowhere close to a final MS, but there
>> were
>> > several completed ship designs.
>>
>> Any chance you could post them, or send them to Jeff @ Freelance to
>> publish?
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Ewan
>> --
>> [2]
>>
>> "When I go home I will tell of them and say,
>> For our tomorrow, They gave their today."
>>
>> My spelling is entirerly due to dyslexia, typos, and poetic license
>>
>>
>>

With physical access all bets are off. even modern Macs have
pretty weak security. Somewhere here there's a Virus analogy.

---
from my T989

wrote:


It's in the storage unit, so I can't look at it. I think the Mac
OS was in
the 6 series. Does that seem right for 1991? It was the OS before
the one
that allowed you to have more than one application open at the
same time.
It's funny, but it has been standard for so long to have multiple
apps
concurrently running that I can't remember the term for it back
when it was
a Big Deal.

On Fri, 15 Jun 2012 03:50:48 +0100 (BST), Eamon Watters
< <eamonwatter

I think the reason was this, though as I've only browsed the Mark1 Mod 0 Rulebook, and don't own it, so I may be in error:
 
Wilds Governments were introduced in the Mark1 Mod 0 Rulebook, but not the Wilds Allegance codes (or maybe they were left out of the Subsector Data). Thus the only way of knowing if a world was definitely a Wilds Government was if it was mentioned in some text referring to the world. Having a Subsector Map was good, but not perfect as there were a significant number of non-Polity worlds in Diaspora, and a few in the OE (too few?), that used the normal Government Codes.
 
The Mark1 Mod 1 Rulebook fixed this simply and elegantly with the "Wi" alegance code, the HIWG suggestion (which Don appears to have taken for Mark1 Mod 1 Errata) was to re-convert Wilds Government Codes to normal Government Codes, with a small chance of having a TED, with that being reflected with a 'Td' in the UWP comments.
 
Eamon

From: "" <>
To:
Sent: Thursday, 14 June 2012, 22:49
Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Question for the group

 
Aaaahh, yes. NOT "Wilds" allegiance codes as I was thinking, but Wilds
government codes. I remember now we had to do that, but the details elude
me at the moment.

On Thu, 14 Jun 2012 14:38:22 +0100 (BST), Eamon Watters
<eamonwatter

If I had to say my recollection, it would be that the Wilds government
type was only a range from 1-6, but that 1-6 digit looked identical to the
1-6 digit of a non-Wilds gov't type, so you couldn't tell, "is that a Type
4 regular government, or a type 4 Wilds government? And the way to tell
was if it had a "Wi" code, it was a Wilds gov't, otherwise a standard UPP
government.

Maybe that's right, maybe not.

> I think the reason was this, though as I've only browsed the Mark1 Mod 0
> Rulebook, and don't own it, so I may be in error:
>  
> Wilds Governments were introduced in the Mark1 Mod 0 Rulebook, but not the
> Wilds Allegance codes (or maybe they were left out of the Subsector Data).
> Thus the only way of knowing if a world was definitely a Wilds Government
> was if it was mentioned in some text referring to the world. Having a
> Subsector Map was good, but not perfect as there were a significant number
> of non-Polity worlds in Diaspora, and a few in the OE (too few?), that
> used the normal Government Codes.
>  
> The Mark1 Mod 1 Rulebook fixed this simply and elegantly with the "Wi"
> alegance code, the HIWG suggestion (which Don appears to have taken for
> Mark1 Mod 1 Errata) was to re-convert Wilds Government Codes to normal
> Government Codes, with a small chance of having a TED, with that being
> reflected with a 'Td' in the UWP comments.
>  
> Eamon
>
> From: "" <>
> To:
> Sent: Thursday, 14 June 2012, 22:49
> Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Question for the group
>
>
>  
> Aaaahh, yes. NOT "Wilds" allegiance codes as I was thinking, but Wilds
> government codes. I remember now we had to do that, but the details elude
> me at the moment.
>
> On Thu, 14 Jun 2012 14:38:22 +0100 (BST), Eamon Watters
> <eamonwatter

On 15 Jun 2012 at 3:50, Eamon Watters wrote:

> A pal of mine is a Mac uber-fan. If you can tell me the type of Mac he might be able to think of a work-around.

Actually, the simplest one is that you can just pull the hard drive
and plug it into another system. If it's SCSI, then that's a bit
harder to pull off, but not that hard.

Heck, I think there's software for reading Mavc drives in windows or
Linux boxes, so the password protection may not even be an issue.
Depends on whether the password is for access to the system(ie a
login), or if the actual file system is protected).

>  
> Eamon
>
> From: "" <>
> To:
> Sent: Friday, 15 June 2012, 10:02
> Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Question for the group
>
>
>  
> If I could dig them out of my old Mac, I would. But I checked it several
> years ago and it was password protected, and I can't remember the password.
> I don't even know if the machine will boot anymore.
>
> On Thu, 14 Jun 2012 17:26:51 +0100, Ewan Quibell <ewan%

I put that in there based on in put from Marc, Frank and Loren.

However, it's happily wrong. I was really just trying to account for all known product numbers.

Hmm... in my notes, Marc received no drafts, and Frank and Loren didn't keep any. Doesn't mean they didn't exist, just that they didn't have them.

Wish I'd been paying better attention, I was with Marc yesterday working on the T5 project and performing FFE housekeeping.

Dave, whatever corrections and additions you have for the errata, I'm willing to translate scribbles and read discarded folded up edits if you have them.

If you have more substantive manuscripts, I suspect Marc would like to talk to you directly.

And as far as the McKinney anything being in error, that won't be the first time. But easily fixed!

--- In , <dcndcn13@...> wrote:
>
> Oh yeah, and the McKinney consolidated errata PDF is in error. He states
> that no work had started on Regency Starship Guide. That's not true. I was
> partway along in writing it. Nowhere close to a final MS, but there were
> several completed ship designs.
>

I don't know by what mechanism Marc would have received any drafts. There
was no effort to collect any remaining materials that was communicated to
me, and Frank came by and told me on my front porch as I was packing up my
house that they had decided to sell off their remaining stock and close. I
took my Mac with me because there was the thought that we could perhaps
squeeze something else out before the end, like RSG, but that ended fairly
quickly.

I have all kinds of stuff in boxes in a couple storage units, but I can
make no commitment to whether or how soon I can go through any of it.

> I put that in there based on in put from Marc, Frank and Loren.
>
> However, it's happily wrong. I was really just trying to account for all
> known product numbers.
>
> Hmm... in my notes, Marc received no drafts, and Frank and Loren didn't
> keep any. Doesn't mean they didn't exist, just that they didn't have them.
>
> Wish I'd been paying better attention, I was with Marc yesterday working
> on the T5 project and performing FFE housekeeping.
>
> Dave, whatever corrections and additions you have for the errata, I'm
> willing to translate scribbles and read discarded folded up edits if you
> have them.
>
> If you have more substantive manuscripts, I suspect Marc would like to
> talk to you directly.
>
> And as far as the McKinney anything being in error, that won't be the
> first time. But easily fixed!
>
> --- In , <dcndcn13@...> wrote:
>>
>> Oh yeah, and the McKinney consolidated errata PDF is in error. He states
>> that no work had started on Regency Starship Guide. That's not true. I
>> was
>> partway along in writing it. Nowhere close to a final MS, but there were
>> several completed ship designs.
>>
>
>
>
>

--- In , shadow@... wrote:
>
> On 15 Jun 2012 at 12:32, Eamon Watters wrote:
>
> > Shadow? I.e. the Shadow from the old TML? If so, it's great to see
> > you're still around dispensing very useful information. Cheers!
>
> The "old TML" is still there cranking along. And I still post.
>
>
> --
> Leonard Erickson (aka shadow)
> shadow at shadowgard dot com
>

"Cranking" being the operative word. My membership (now under my fourth or fifth email address) is only a month or two younger than Leonard's, and if there is any optimism about Traveller's future in the remaining membership, it has not been visible since Imperium Games fumbled the ball in the 90s.

On 15/06/2012 02:02, wrote:
> If I could dig them out of my old Mac, I would. But I checked it several
> years ago and it was password protected, and I can't remember the password.
> I don't even know if the machine will boot anymore.

If it is a Macintosh Classic you can boot to the ROM disk by holding
down Command+Option+X+O or you can try holding down the shift key during
start up as this may bypass the protection software.

Best regards,

Ewan
--


"When I go home I will tell of them and say,
For our tomorrow, They gave their today."

My spelling is entirerly due to dyslexia, typos, and poetic license

Thanks, Ewan, I will try your key-press solutions.

Dave

> On 15/06/2012 02:02, wrote:
>> If I could dig them out of my old Mac, I would. But I checked it several
>> years ago and it was password protected, and I can't remember the
>> password.
>> I don't even know if the machine will boot anymore.
>
> If it is a Macintosh Classic you can boot to the ROM disk by holding
> down Command+Option+X+O or you can try holding down the shift key during
> start up as this may bypass the protection software.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Ewan
> --
>

I think with the Mark 1 Mod 1 TNE, December 1993, government allegiance codes don't directly affect trade, save for Rich Worlds. However, the Rich World designation does not apply to worlds in the Wilds, nullifying this problem. Reference: P26 Challenge 77, Notes on Collapsing Worlds, Geo Gelinas with annotations by Commodore Bwana.

Eamon

________________________________
From: donm61873
Sent: Saturday, 16 June 2012, 1:19
Subject: [Traveller_TNE] Re: Question for the group


 
Eamon -- in my notes, the main issue for the errata on the Wilds codes is that it doesn't work with the Trade system. Also, I released new errata (0.03) in January which has errata for some of the errata.

As to sources, I started with the few items Marc had, but I've been in contact with both Frank (who allowed me to use material from Test of Battle in the errata) and Loren. Sadly, neither of them had saved much after all this time.

And if you have details to let the Wilds codes work in the Trade system, I'd love to have that. Otherwise, the errata is basically to define TEDs using the original standard gov codes, and note that it is a TED.

On the other hand, not too much trade going on with the TEDs...

Now, if Dave (or anyone else) has notes or suggestions, I'm ready to start on v0.04 of the errata...

--- In , Eamon Watters <eamonwatters@...> wrote:
>
> I think the reason was this, though as I've only browsed the Mark1 Mod 0 Rulebook, and don't own it, so I may be in error:
>  
> Wilds Governments were introduced in the Mark1 Mod 0 Rulebook, but not the Wilds Allegance codes (or maybe they were left out of the Subsector Data). Thus the only way of knowing if a world was definitely a Wilds Government was if it was mentioned in some text referring to the world. Having a Subsector Map was good, but not perfect as there were a significant number of non-Polity worlds in Diaspora, and a few in the OE (too few?), that used the normal Government Codes.
>  
> The Mark1 Mod 1 Rulebook fixed this simply and elegantly with the "Wi" alegance code, the HIWG suggestion (which Don appears to have taken for Mark1 Mod 1 Errata) was to re-convert Wilds Government Codes to normal Government Codes, with a small chance of having a TED, with that being reflected with a 'Td' in the UWP comments.
>  
> Eamon

I shall have to try and sign up again then - last time I tried I couldn't join for some reason.

Eamon

________________________________
Sent: Saturday, 16 June 2012, 6:17
Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Question for the group


 
On 15 Jun 2012 at 12:32, Eamon Watters wrote:

> Shadow? I.e. the Shadow from the old TML? If so, it's great to see
> you're still around dispensing very useful information. Cheers!

The "old TML" is still there cranking along. And I still post.

--
Leonard Erickson (aka shadow)
shadow at shadowgard dot com

Thanks for pointing that out. One more thing for me to try to revisit and
double-check my brain when I unearth my stuff. However, finding relevant
stuff in Challenge magazines was always difficult. On the one hand, I
thought it was important to get important new data/corrections out as
rapidly as possible, hence Challenge, but it's always easier to find if
you can compile it in a book on the topic.

> I think with the Mark 1 Mod 1 TNE, December 1993, government allegiance
> codes don't directly affect trade, save for Rich Worlds. However, the Rich
> World designation does not apply to worlds in the Wilds, nullifying this
> problem. Reference: P26 Challenge 77, Notes on Collapsing Worlds, Geo
> Gelinas with annotations by Commodore Bwana.
>
> Eamon
>
>
>
> ________________________________
From: donm61873
Sent: Saturday, 16 June 2012, 1:19
Subject: [Traveller_TNE] Re: Question for the group
>
>
>  
> Eamon -- in my notes, the main issue for the errata on the Wilds codes is
> that it doesn't work with the Trade system. Also, I released new errata
> (0.03) in January which has errata for some of the errata.
>
> As to sources, I started with the few items Marc had, but I've been in
> contact with both Frank (who allowed me to use material from Test of
> Battle in the errata) and Loren. Sadly, neither of them had saved much
> after all this time.
>
> And if you have details to let the Wilds codes work in the Trade system,
> I'd love to have that. Otherwise, the errata is basically to define TEDs
> using the original standard gov codes, and note that it is a TED.
>
> On the other hand, not too much trade going on with the TEDs...
>
> Now, if Dave (or anyone else) has notes or suggestions, I'm ready to start
> on v0.04 of the errata...
>
> --- In , Eamon Watters <eamonwatters@...>
> wrote:
>>
>> I think the reason was this, though as I've only browsed the Mark1 Mod 0
>> Rulebook, and don't own it, so I may be in error:
>>  
>> Wilds Governments were introduced in the Mark1 Mod 0 Rulebook, but not
>> the Wilds Allegance codes (or maybe they were left out of the Subsector
>> Data). Thus the only way of knowing if a world was definitely a Wilds
>> Government was if it was mentioned in some text referring to the world.
>> Having a Subsector Map was good, but not perfect as there were a
>> significant number of non-Polity worlds in Diaspora, and a few in the OE
>> (too few?), that used the normal Government Codes.
>>  
>> The Mark1 Mod 1 Rulebook fixed this simply and elegantly with the "Wi"
>> alegance code, the HIWG suggestion (which Don appears to have taken
>> for Mark1 Mod 1 Errata) was to re-convert Wilds Government
>> Codes to normal Government Codes, with a small chance of having a TED,
>> with that being reflected with a 'Td' in the UWP comments.
>>  
>> Eamon
>
>
>

Sad to say (proud to say!?), I've a pretty good memory when it comes to TNE stuff I've read. The main books were one of the few things I took to Japan when I moved there in '03.

Getting the new data and corrections out quick was one of the endearing things about GDW, at least in the time I experienced it - customer focused before 'customer focused' became a standard - and thus meaningless - phrase.

Eamon

>From: "" <>

>Thanks for pointing that out. One more thing for me to try to revisit and
>double-check my brain when I unearth my stuff. However, finding relevant
>stuff in Challenge magazines was always difficult. On the one hand, I
>thought it was important to get important new data/corrections out as
>rapidly as possible, hence Challenge, but it's always easier to find if
>you can compile it in a book on the topic.

What did you do in Japan?

And re: your "customer focused" remark, thank you. I genuinely appreciate
that.

The summer of 94 was the year that the game industry began its slide into
corporatization. The WOTC booth, and the words coming out of their
salespeople, "product," and all kinds of compound words with "customer" in
them were just like being at the big defense trade shows. And I mean that
in a not-good way.

> Sad to say (proud to say!?), I've a pretty good memory when it comes to
> TNE stuff I've read. The main books were one of the few things I took to
> Japan when I moved there in '03.
>
> Getting the new data and corrections out quick was one of the endearing
> things about GDW, at least in the time I experienced it - customer focused
> before 'customer focused' became a standard - and thus meaningless -
> phrase.
>
>
> Eamon

Still in Japan, teaching English for my sins.

Yes, the WOTC style 'big business' approach certainly was a victory of greed over morals. There's a good Con in Southern Ireland - Warpcon in Cork. I went down in 94, and had an amazing time in a Merc 2000 game set in Sevastopol - GM had Maps of the whole area, and had obviously studied both them, and the politico-judicial set-up in the area. Amazing. Some people were playing a new card game of some kind. Next year the GM was toting a bag filled with cards and coloured pebbles...

Eamon

________________________________
Sent: Tuesday, 19 June 2012, 1:28
Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Re: Question for the group


 
What did you do in Japan?

And re: your "customer focused" remark, thank you. I genuinely appreciate
that.

The summer of 94 was the year that the game industry began its slide into
corporatization. The WOTC booth, and the words coming out of their
salespeople, "product," and all kinds of compound words with "customer" in
them were just like being at the big defense trade shows. And I mean that
in a not-good way.

> Sad to say (proud to say!?), I've a pretty good memory when it comes to
> TNE stuff I've read. The main books were one of the few things I took to
> Japan when I moved there in '03.
>
> Getting the new data and corrections out quick was one of the endearing
> things about GDW, at least in the time I experienced it - customer focused
> before 'customer focused' became a standard - and thus meaningless -
> phrase.
>
>
> Eamon

We got independent accounts from a number of people in the gaming
"industry" that the WOTC staff were keeping a list of the other gaming
companies they hoped to put out of business, and GDW was on it.

If true, that sort of thinking was so foreign to the way the gaming
"industry" ran it was ridiculous. We were all each other's biggest fans.
One of the best things about the cons was getting together, seeing each
other, trading copies of our newest games to each other, etc. The last
thing any of us ever wanted was to put any one of us out of business. We
did grate a little bit under "the 800 pound gorilla" of TSR, living in the
shadow of their castle at the cons, but we all had friends working there.
One of the reasons I took the "putting out of business list" seriously,
aside from the fact that so many reputable people came to us with it
(Mayfair, for example) is that it was so foreign to the thinking in the
game "industry" that how would anyone even think to make that up?

And that's when the game "industry" became the game industry. Might as
well be working for Lockheed-Martin.ill

"Brilliant Lances" was nominated for best SF boardgame of the year, but
lost to MTG. The next year they had a new category for CCGs so they
wouldn't beat boardgames in the boardgame category, but by then, MTGs and
CCGs were beating down entire companies. And they eventually bought out
the TSR castle.

I may have said that before here, but I'm talking to lots of people, so
I'm not sure.

Dave

> Still in Japan, teaching English for my sins.
>
> Yes, the WOTC style 'big business' approach certainly was a victory of
> greed over morals. There's a good Con in Southern Ireland - Warpcon in
> Cork. I went down in 94, and had an amazing time in a Merc 2000 game set
> in Sevastopol - GM had Maps of the whole area, and had obviously studied
> both them, and the politico-judicial set-up in the area. Amazing. Some
> people were playing a new card game of some kind. Next year the GM was
> toting a bag filled with cards and coloured pebbles...
>
> Eamon
>
>
> ________________________________
Sent: Tuesday, 19 June 2012, 1:28
Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Re: Question for the group
>
>
>  
> What did you do in Japan?
>
> And re: your "customer focused" remark, thank you. I genuinely appreciate
> that.
>
> The summer of 94 was the year that the game industry began its slide into
> corporatization. The WOTC booth, and the words coming out of their
> salespeople, "product," and all kinds of compound words with "customer" in
> them were just like being at the big defense trade shows. And I mean that
> in a not-good way.
>
>> Sad to say (proud to say!?), I've a pretty good memory when it comes to
>> TNE stuff I've read. The main books were one of the few things I took to
>> Japan when I moved there in '03.
>>
>> Getting the new data and corrections out quick was one of the endearing
>> things about GDW, at least in the time I experienced it - customer
>> focused
>> before 'customer focused' became a standard - and thus meaningless -
>> phrase.
>>
>>
>> Eamon
>
>
>

I have two minds about my hobbies and the industries that make them.

I recall well the time Dave refers to and with honest reflection back that
far gaming was a quaint sub culture hobby thing.

When business folk figured out how much money there was to be made from it,
that is when it became an industry. Obviously not over night or all at once
but it did happen over a decade.

I do not begrudge anyone trying to make a buck or lots of bucks, if someone
thinks there is a market god bless go forth and try.

But in the story of WotC/TSR circles it seems that a couple of key factors
play into this. While I am an outsider to both companies I live 15 minutes
from WotC HQ in Seattle and over the years in Computer Games have worked
with designers and artists that have worked at both companies on and off.

A couple of facts about them are clear and are pretty much undisputed by
former employees. WotC would not have been the beast it was without MTG and
the Pokemon phenom that propelled CCGs into the craziness it because. This
level of widespread acceptance gave WotC the 'money' to basically curb
stomp competitors wholesale. Without the successful MGT they wouldn't be
the company they are today for good or ill.

The corporate culture at WotC as odd as it sounds is controlled by their
R&D department because they created MTG originally. Because of this they
have been stuck in a rut for over a decade, at least imo.

TSR for all its troubles simply failed to transition from a publishing
business model (making books) to a service model. Perhaps this is still a
struggle they experiencing today under WotC not so gentle 'eye of sauron".

And while it may not of been indicative of the game industry back in the
day to have a 'competitor list' to crush its pretty common in other
industries where there is a lot of variety.

And at the end of the day, business' are in it for the money otherwise they
fold. We can have all the romantic thoughts we like but this however it is
the true in today's world.

Its a sad state of affairs but its an inevitable truth of capitalism.

On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 7:46 AM, <> wrote:

> **
>
>
> We got independent accounts from a number of people in the gaming
> "industry" that the WOTC staff were keeping a list of the other gaming
> companies they hoped to put out of business, and GDW was on it.
>
> If true, that sort of thinking was so foreign to the way the gaming
> "industry" ran it was ridiculous. We were all each other's biggest fans.
> One of the best things about the cons was getting together, seeing each
> other, trading copies of our newest games to each other, etc. The last
> thing any of us ever wanted was to put any one of us out of business. We
> did grate a little bit under "the 800 pound gorilla" of TSR, living in the
> shadow of their castle at the cons, but we all had friends working there.
> One of the reasons I took the "putting out of business list" seriously,
> aside from the fact that so many reputable people came to us with it
> (Mayfair, for example) is that it was so foreign to the thinking in the
> game "industry" that how would anyone even think to make that up?
>
> And that's when the game "industry" became the game industry. Might as
> well be working for Lockheed-Martin.ill
>
> "Brilliant Lances" was nominated for best SF boardgame of the year, but
> lost to MTG. The next year they had a new category for CCGs so they
> wouldn't beat boardgames in the boardgame category, but by then, MTGs and
> CCGs were beating down entire companies. And they eventually bought out
> the TSR castle.
>
> I may have said that before here, but I'm talking to lots of people, so
> I'm not sure.
>
> Dave
>
>
If the world was fair then every bad thing that has ever happened to you
would have been deserved.

John--

In your excellent discussion you got at something that I should have made
clearer.

The "put them out of business" list was so foreign to the gaming cottage
industry at the time not because it was evil (it may or may not be), but
because it was pure capitalism/corporate thinking. That's what you do when
you're a competing company: seize market share. You don't sit around and
wait for the pie to grow so everyone's slice gets a little bigger. And
that focus on market share is what distinguished the Real Businesses like
WOTC when they arrived. Until then, the industry was, by-and-large, what I
called a "cottage industry," or you called a "quaint sub culture hobby
thing." Mom and pop shops.

And don't get me wrong, I thought MTG was brilliant. It combined the two
great addictions: collecting mania (and gamers were very much already in
the collector mindset) and power-gaming, where the more you buy, the
better you can play. Honestly I don't recall in time where MTG fell out
compared to Pokemon, but MTG was certainly a tidal wave within the
"wargame" industry proper, as opposed to larger gaming where Pokemon might
have been.

As you observed, because MTG succeeded, it generated money, which allowed
them to behave the way they did, and of course attracted the attention of
Big Business and Big Business Practices. Like running competitors out of
business for market share.

One of the things I hate about the Big Business model is that so often the
non-creative types set the vocabularly. Everything is called generic,
undifferentiated "product," like it's a brick of concentrated protein, or
a 55 gallon drum of toxic waste. I don't give a hoot in hell for someone
who doesn't care if something is a "book" or a "game" and why that book is
important. And maybe that's partly why I was one of the ones swept away.

In a sense, the industry went through a huge evolutionary extinction
event. 1993 was the end of the Triassic and GDW was one of the great
archosaurs that got swept away by the asteroid (or whatever else it might
have been).

GDW DID consider attempting to put out a CCG, but our decision was no, and
for two reasons:

1. We figured that most of the late-comers jumping onto the CCG bandwagon
would get lost in the backwash, and instead of doing a "me too!" change in
direction, we should stick to what we already did best. Call that artistic
integrity of a sort.

2. In order to compete with what MTG already was, you had to have really,
really high production values. If not, you'd fail immediately. We realized
we did not have the money to completely change direction, put out all
these slick, high-quality, cut-edge card stock things. Call that economic
realism.

So we went down. (and yes, there were other factors, but that was the
final blow)

Dave

> I have two minds about my hobbies and the industries that make them.
>
> I recall well the time Dave refers to and with honest reflection back that
> far gaming was a quaint sub culture hobby thing.
>
> When business folk figured out how much money there was to be made from
> it,
> that is when it became an industry. Obviously not over night or all at
> once
> but it did happen over a decade.
>
> I do not begrudge anyone trying to make a buck or lots of bucks, if
> someone
> thinks there is a market god bless go forth and try.
>
> But in the story of WotC/TSR circles it seems that a couple of key factors
> play into this. While I am an outsider to both companies I live 15 minutes
> from WotC HQ in Seattle and over the years in Computer Games have worked
> with designers and artists that have worked at both companies on and off.
>
> A couple of facts about them are clear and are pretty much undisputed by
> former employees. WotC would not have been the beast it was without MTG
> and
> the Pokemon phenom that propelled CCGs into the craziness it because. This
> level of widespread acceptance gave WotC the 'money' to basically curb
> stomp competitors wholesale. Without the successful MGT they wouldn't be
> the company they are today for good or ill.
>
> The corporate culture at WotC as odd as it sounds is controlled by their
> R&D department because they created MTG originally. Because of this they
> have been stuck in a rut for over a decade, at least imo.
>
> TSR for all its troubles simply failed to transition from a publishing
> business model (making books) to a service model. Perhaps this is still a
> struggle they experiencing today under WotC not so gentle 'eye of sauron".
>
> And while it may not of been indicative of the game industry back in the
> day to have a 'competitor list' to crush its pretty common in other
> industries where there is a lot of variety.
>
> And at the end of the day, business' are in it for the money otherwise
> they
> fold. We can have all the romantic thoughts we like but this however it is
> the true in today's world.
>
> Its a sad state of affairs but its an inevitable truth of capitalism.
>
> On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 7:46 AM, <> wrote:
>
>> **
>>
>>
>> We got independent accounts from a number of people in the gaming
>> "industry" that the WOTC staff were keeping a list of the other gaming
>> companies they hoped to put out of business, and GDW was on it.
>>
>> If true, that sort of thinking was so foreign to the way the gaming
>> "industry" ran it was ridiculous. We were all each other's biggest fans.
>> One of the best things about the cons was getting together, seeing each
>> other, trading copies of our newest games to each other, etc. The last
>> thing any of us ever wanted was to put any one of us out of business. We
>> did grate a little bit under "the 800 pound gorilla" of TSR, living in
>> the
>> shadow of their castle at the cons, but we all had friends working
>> there.
>> One of the reasons I took the "putting out of business list" seriously,
>> aside from the fact that so many reputable people came to us with it
>> (Mayfair, for example) is that it was so foreign to the thinking in the
>> game "industry" that how would anyone even think to make that up?
>>
>> And that's when the game "industry" became the game industry. Might as
>> well be working for Lockheed-Martin.ill
>>
>> "Brilliant Lances" was nominated for best SF boardgame of the year, but
>> lost to MTG. The next year they had a new category for CCGs so they
>> wouldn't beat boardgames in the boardgame category, but by then, MTGs
>> and
>> CCGs were beating down entire companies. And they eventually bought out
>> the TSR castle.
>>
>> I may have said that before here, but I'm talking to lots of people, so
>> I'm not sure.
>>
>> Dave
>>
>>
> If the world was fair then every bad thing that has ever happened to you
> would have been deserved.
>

I personally see 'focusing on what you do best' as a formula for success.
case in point Apple with Jobs at the helm the second time around.

They went from a dozen products down to 4 and made them so well everyone
else was left wondering what passed them by. (I don't like apple products
personally but its a good example for what I am illustrating)

IMO company's often substitute diversity for quality because they lack the
capacity to innovate. This is why many companies get large and bloated
producing over priced products with only incremental changes to try and
tease consumers to the next version.

It seems to me that this is a long cancerous death of companies.

On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 8:44 AM, <> wrote:

> **
>
>
> John--
>
> In your excellent discussion you got at something that I should have made
> clearer.
>
> The "put them out of business" list was so foreign to the gaming cottage
> industry at the time not because it was evil (it may or may not be), but
> because it was pure capitalism/corporate thinking. That's what you do when
> you're a competing company: seize market share. You don't sit around and
> wait for the pie to grow so everyone's slice gets a little bigger. And
> that focus on market share is what distinguished the Real Businesses like
> WOTC when they arrived. Until then, the industry was, by-and-large, what I
> called a "cottage industry," or you called a "quaint sub culture hobby
> thing." Mom and pop shops.
>
> And don't get me wrong, I thought MTG was brilliant. It combined the two
> great addictions: collecting mania (and gamers were very much already in
> the collector mindset) and power-gaming, where the more you buy, the
> better you can play. Honestly I don't recall in time where MTG fell out
> compared to Pokemon, but MTG was certainly a tidal wave within the
> "wargame" industry proper, as opposed to larger gaming where Pokemon might
> have been.
>
> As you observed, because MTG succeeded, it generated money, which allowed
> them to behave the way they did, and of course attracted the attention of
> Big Business and Big Business Practices. Like running competitors out of
> business for market share.
>
> One of the things I hate about the Big Business model is that so often the
> non-creative types set the vocabularly. Everything is called generic,
> undifferentiated "product," like it's a brick of concentrated protein, or
> a 55 gallon drum of toxic waste. I don't give a hoot in hell for someone
> who doesn't care if something is a "book" or a "game" and why that book is
> important. And maybe that's partly why I was one of the ones swept away.
>
> In a sense, the industry went through a huge evolutionary extinction
> event. 1993 was the end of the Triassic and GDW was one of the great
> archosaurs that got swept away by the asteroid (or whatever else it might
> have been).
>
> GDW DID consider attempting to put out a CCG, but our decision was no, and
> for two reasons:
>
> 1. We figured that most of the late-comers jumping onto the CCG bandwagon
> would get lost in the backwash, and instead of doing a "me too!" change in
> direction, we should stick to what we already did best. Call that artistic
> integrity of a sort.
>
> 2. In order to compete with what MTG already was, you had to have really,
> really high production values. If not, you'd fail immediately. We realized
> we did not have the money to completely change direction, put out all
> these slick, high-quality, cut-edge card stock things. Call that economic
> realism.
>
> So we went down. (and yes, there were other factors, but that was the
> final blow)
>
> Dave
>
>
> > I have two minds about my hobbies and the industries that make them.
> >
> > I recall well the time Dave refers to and with honest reflection back
> that
> > far gaming was a quaint sub culture hobby thing.
> >
> > When business folk figured out how much money there was to be made from
> > it,
> > that is when it became an industry. Obviously not over night or all at
> > once
> > but it did happen over a decade.
> >
> > I do not begrudge anyone trying to make a buck or lots of bucks, if
> > someone
> > thinks there is a market god bless go forth and try.
> >
> > But in the story of WotC/TSR circles it seems that a couple of key
> factors
> > play into this. While I am an outsider to both companies I live 15
> minutes
> > from WotC HQ in Seattle and over the years in Computer Games have worked
> > with designers and artists that have worked at both companies on and off.
> >
> > A couple of facts about them are clear and are pretty much undisputed by
> > former employees. WotC would not have been the beast it was without MTG
> > and
> > the Pokemon phenom that propelled CCGs into the craziness it because.
> This
> > level of widespread acceptance gave WotC the 'money' to basically curb
> > stomp competitors wholesale. Without the successful MGT they wouldn't be
> > the company they are today for good or ill.
> >
> > The corporate culture at WotC as odd as it sounds is controlled by their
> > R&D department because they created MTG originally. Because of this they
> > have been stuck in a rut for over a decade, at least imo.
> >
> > TSR for all its troubles simply failed to transition from a publishing
> > business model (making books) to a service model. Perhaps this is still a
> > struggle they experiencing today under WotC not so gentle 'eye of
> sauron".
> >
> > And while it may not of been indicative of the game industry back in the
> > day to have a 'competitor list' to crush its pretty common in other
> > industries where there is a lot of variety.
> >
> > And at the end of the day, business' are in it for the money otherwise
> > they
> > fold. We can have all the romantic thoughts we like but this however it
> is
> > the true in today's world.
> >
> > Its a sad state of affairs but its an inevitable truth of capitalism.
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 7:46 AM, <> wrote:
> >
> >> **
>
> >>
> >>
> >> We got independent accounts from a number of people in the gaming
> >> "industry" that the WOTC staff were keeping a list of the other gaming
> >> companies they hoped to put out of business, and GDW was on it.
> >>
> >> If true, that sort of thinking was so foreign to the way the gaming
> >> "industry" ran it was ridiculous. We were all each other's biggest fans.
> >> One of the best things about the cons was getting together, seeing each
> >> other, trading copies of our newest games to each other, etc. The last
> >> thing any of us ever wanted was to put any one of us out of business. We
> >> did grate a little bit under "the 800 pound gorilla" of TSR, living in
> >> the
> >> shadow of their castle at the cons, but we all had friends working
> >> there.
> >> One of the reasons I took the "putting out of business list" seriously,
> >> aside from the fact that so many reputable people came to us with it
> >> (Mayfair, for example) is that it was so foreign to the thinking in the
> >> game "industry" that how would anyone even think to make that up?
> >>
> >> And that's when the game "industry" became the game industry. Might as
> >> well be working for Lockheed-Martin.ill
> >>
> >> "Brilliant Lances" was nominated for best SF boardgame of the year, but
> >> lost to MTG. The next year they had a new category for CCGs so they
> >> wouldn't beat boardgames in the boardgame category, but by then, MTGs
> >> and
> >> CCGs were beating down entire companies. And they eventually bought out
> >> the TSR castle.
> >>
> >> I may have said that before here, but I'm talking to lots of people, so
> >> I'm not sure.
> >>
> >> Dave
> >>
> >>
> > If the world was fair then every bad thing that has ever happened to you
> > would have been deserved.
> >
>
>
>

--
If the world was fair then every bad thing that has ever happened to you
would have been deserved.

John

> I personally see 'focusing on what you do best' as a formula for success.

Yeah, instead of chasing the illusive (and I deliberately did not type the
standard "elusive") latest "what do people want TODAY?" Sound reasoning,
but for GDW, bad timing.

And we felt in TNE that we were putting out some really good stuff like
RSB which our customers never saw, because the distributors and retailers
were so busy stocking and restocking MTG that RSB literally never got onto
a great many shelves.

It's just that what we did best was going through a period where it was
going to be eclipsed by some other stuff, and we were weak enough for some
other reasons that we couldn't wait out the drought.

Dave

> I personally see 'focusing on what you do best' as a formula for success.
> case in point Apple with Jobs at the helm the second time around.
>
> They went from a dozen products down to 4 and made them so well everyone
> else was left wondering what passed them by. (I don't like apple products
> personally but its a good example for what I am illustrating)
>
> IMO company's often substitute diversity for quality because they lack the
> capacity to innovate. This is why many companies get large and bloated
> producing over priced products with only incremental changes to try and
> tease consumers to the next version.
>
> It seems to me that this is a long cancerous death of companies.
>
> On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 8:44 AM, <> wrote:
>
>> **
>>
>>
>> John--
>>
>> In your excellent discussion you got at something that I should have
>> made
>> clearer.
>>
>> The "put them out of business" list was so foreign to the gaming cottage
>> industry at the time not because it was evil (it may or may not be), but
>> because it was pure capitalism/corporate thinking. That's what you do
>> when
>> you're a competing company: seize market share. You don't sit around and
>> wait for the pie to grow so everyone's slice gets a little bigger. And
>> that focus on market share is what distinguished the Real Businesses
>> like
>> WOTC when they arrived. Until then, the industry was, by-and-large, what
>> I
>> called a "cottage industry," or you called a "quaint sub culture hobby
>> thing." Mom and pop shops.
>>
>> And don't get me wrong, I thought MTG was brilliant. It combined the two
>> great addictions: collecting mania (and gamers were very much already in
>> the collector mindset) and power-gaming, where the more you buy, the
>> better you can play. Honestly I don't recall in time where MTG fell out
>> compared to Pokemon, but MTG was certainly a tidal wave within the
>> "wargame" industry proper, as opposed to larger gaming where Pokemon
>> might
>> have been.
>>
>> As you observed, because MTG succeeded, it generated money, which
>> allowed
>> them to behave the way they did, and of course attracted the attention
>> of
>> Big Business and Big Business Practices. Like running competitors out of
>> business for market share.
>>
>> One of the things I hate about the Big Business model is that so often
>> the
>> non-creative types set the vocabularly. Everything is called generic,
>> undifferentiated "product," like it's a brick of concentrated protein,
>> or
>> a 55 gallon drum of toxic waste. I don't give a hoot in hell for someone
>> who doesn't care if something is a "book" or a "game" and why that book
>> is
>> important. And maybe that's partly why I was one of the ones swept away.
>>
>> In a sense, the industry went through a huge evolutionary extinction
>> event. 1993 was the end of the Triassic and GDW was one of the great
>> archosaurs that got swept away by the asteroid (or whatever else it
>> might
>> have been).
>>
>> GDW DID consider attempting to put out a CCG, but our decision was no,
>> and
>> for two reasons:
>>
>> 1. We figured that most of the late-comers jumping onto the CCG
>> bandwagon
>> would get lost in the backwash, and instead of doing a "me too!" change
>> in
>> direction, we should stick to what we already did best. Call that
>> artistic
>> integrity of a sort.
>>
>> 2. In order to compete with what MTG already was, you had to have
>> really,
>> really high production values. If not, you'd fail immediately. We
>> realized
>> we did not have the money to completely change direction, put out all
>> these slick, high-quality, cut-edge card stock things. Call that
>> economic
>> realism.
>>
>> So we went down. (and yes, there were other factors, but that was the
>> final blow)
>>
>> Dave
>>
>>
>> > I have two minds about my hobbies and the industries that make them.
>> >
>> > I recall well the time Dave refers to and with honest reflection back
>> that
>> > far gaming was a quaint sub culture hobby thing.
>> >
>> > When business folk figured out how much money there was to be made
>> from
>> > it,
>> > that is when it became an industry. Obviously not over night or all at
>> > once
>> > but it did happen over a decade.
>> >
>> > I do not begrudge anyone trying to make a buck or lots of bucks, if
>> > someone
>> > thinks there is a market god bless go forth and try.
>> >
>> > But in the story of WotC/TSR circles it seems that a couple of key
>> factors
>> > play into this. While I am an outsider to both companies I live 15
>> minutes
>> > from WotC HQ in Seattle and over the years in Computer Games have
>> worked
>> > with designers and artists that have worked at both companies on and
>> off.
>> >
>> > A couple of facts about them are clear and are pretty much undisputed
>> by
>> > former employees. WotC would not have been the beast it was without
>> MTG
>> > and
>> > the Pokemon phenom that propelled CCGs into the craziness it because.
>> This
>> > level of widespread acceptance gave WotC the 'money' to basically curb
>> > stomp competitors wholesale. Without the successful MGT they wouldn't
>> be
>> > the company they are today for good or ill.
>> >
>> > The corporate culture at WotC as odd as it sounds is controlled by
>> their
>> > R&D department because they created MTG originally. Because of this
>> they
>> > have been stuck in a rut for over a decade, at least imo.
>> >
>> > TSR for all its troubles simply failed to transition from a publishing
>> > business model (making books) to a service model. Perhaps this is
>> still a
>> > struggle they experiencing today under WotC not so gentle 'eye of
>> sauron".
>> >
>> > And while it may not of been indicative of the game industry back in
>> the
>> > day to have a 'competitor list' to crush its pretty common in other
>> > industries where there is a lot of variety.
>> >
>> > And at the end of the day, business' are in it for the money otherwise
>> > they
>> > fold. We can have all the romantic thoughts we like but this however
>> it
>> is
>> > the true in today's world.
>> >
>> > Its a sad state of affairs but its an inevitable truth of capitalism.
>> >
>> > On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 7:46 AM, <> wrote:
>> >
>> >> **
>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> We got independent accounts from a number of people in the gaming
>> >> "industry" that the WOTC staff were keeping a list of the other
>> gaming
>> >> companies they hoped to put out of business, and GDW was on it.
>> >>
>> >> If true, that sort of thinking was so foreign to the way the gaming
>> >> "industry" ran it was ridiculous. We were all each other's biggest
>> fans.
>> >> One of the best things about the cons was getting together, seeing
>> each
>> >> other, trading copies of our newest games to each other, etc. The
>> last
>> >> thing any of us ever wanted was to put any one of us out of business.
>> We
>> >> did grate a little bit under "the 800 pound gorilla" of TSR, living
>> in
>> >> the
>> >> shadow of their castle at the cons, but we all had friends working
>> >> there.
>> >> One of the reasons I took the "putting out of business list"
>> seriously,
>> >> aside from the fact that so many reputable people came to us with it
>> >> (Mayfair, for example) is that it was so foreign to the thinking in
>> the
>> >> game "industry" that how would anyone even think to make that up?
>> >>
>> >> And that's when the game "industry" became the game industry. Might
>> as
>> >> well be working for Lockheed-Martin.ill
>> >>
>> >> "Brilliant Lances" was nominated for best SF boardgame of the year,
>> but
>> >> lost to MTG. The next year they had a new category for CCGs so they
>> >> wouldn't beat boardgames in the boardgame category, but by then, MTGs
>> >> and
>> >> CCGs were beating down entire companies. And they eventually bought
>> out
>> >> the TSR castle.
>> >>
>> >> I may have said that before here, but I'm talking to lots of people,
>> so
>> >> I'm not sure.
>> >>
>> >> Dave
>> >>
>> >>
>> > If the world was fair then every bad thing that has ever happened to
>> you
>> > would have been deserved.
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> If the world was fair then every bad thing that has ever happened to you
> would have been deserved.
>

On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 6:33 AM, Eamon Watters <>wrote:

>
>
> Still in Japan, teaching English for my sins.
>

Where abouts?
--
Evyn

Thankfully my not so local hobby shop carries pretty much everything still. Cards, mini's, comics, models, and more rpg's than you can shake a stick at.

Derek Stanley
Sent from my iPhone...

On 2012-06-19, at 9:04, wrote:

> John
>
> > I personally see 'focusing on what you do best' as a formula for success.
>
> Yeah, instead of chasing the illusive (and I deliberately did not type the
> standard "elusive") latest "what do people want TODAY?" Sound reasoning,
> but for GDW, bad timing.
>
> And we felt in TNE that we were putting out some really good stuff like
> RSB which our customers never saw, because the distributors and retailers
> were so busy stocking and restocking MTG that RSB literally never got onto
> a great many shelves.
>
> It's just that what we did best was going through a period where it was
> going to be eclipsed by some other stuff, and we were weak enough for some
> other reasons that we couldn't wait out the drought.
>
> Dave
>
> > I personally see 'focusing on what you do best' as a formula for success.
> > case in point Apple with Jobs at the helm the second time around.
> >
> > They went from a dozen products down to 4 and made them so well everyone
> > else was left wondering what passed them by. (I don't like apple products
> > personally but its a good example for what I am illustrating)
> >
> > IMO company's often substitute diversity for quality because they lack the
> > capacity to innovate. This is why many companies get large and bloated
> > producing over priced products with only incremental changes to try and
> > tease consumers to the next version.
> >
> > It seems to me that this is a long cancerous death of companies.
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 8:44 AM, <> wrote:
> >
> >> **
> >>
> >>
> >> John--
> >>
> >> In your excellent discussion you got at something that I should have
> >> made
> >> clearer.
> >>
> >> The "put them out of business" list was so foreign to the gaming cottage
> >> industry at the time not because it was evil (it may or may not be), but
> >> because it was pure capitalism/corporate thinking. That's what you do
> >> when
> >> you're a competing company: seize market share. You don't sit around and
> >> wait for the pie to grow so everyone's slice gets a little bigger. And
> >> that focus on market share is what distinguished the Real Businesses
> >> like
> >> WOTC when they arrived. Until then, the industry was, by-and-large, what
> >> I
> >> called a "cottage industry," or you called a "quaint sub culture hobby
> >> thing." Mom and pop shops.
> >>
> >> And don't get me wrong, I thought MTG was brilliant. It combined the two
> >> great addictions: collecting mania (and gamers were very much already in
> >> the collector mindset) and power-gaming, where the more you buy, the
> >> better you can play. Honestly I don't recall in time where MTG fell out
> >> compared to Pokemon, but MTG was certainly a tidal wave within the
> >> "wargame" industry proper, as opposed to larger gaming where Pokemon
> >> might
> >> have been.
> >>
> >> As you observed, because MTG succeeded, it generated money, which
> >> allowed
> >> them to behave the way they did, and of course attracted the attention
> >> of
> >> Big Business and Big Business Practices. Like running competitors out of
> >> business for market share.
> >>
> >> One of the things I hate about the Big Business model is that so often
> >> the
> >> non-creative types set the vocabularly. Everything is called generic,
> >> undifferentiated "product," like it's a brick of concentrated protein,
> >> or
> >> a 55 gallon drum of toxic waste. I don't give a hoot in hell for someone
> >> who doesn't care if something is a "book" or a "game" and why that book
> >> is
> >> important. And maybe that's partly why I was one of the ones swept away.
> >>
> >> In a sense, the industry went through a huge evolutionary extinction
> >> event. 1993 was the end of the Triassic and GDW was one of the great
> >> archosaurs that got swept away by the asteroid (or whatever else it
> >> might
> >> have been).
> >>
> >> GDW DID consider attempting to put out a CCG, but our decision was no,
> >> and
> >> for two reasons:
> >>
> >> 1. We figured that most of the late-comers jumping onto the CCG
> >> bandwagon
> >> would get lost in the backwash, and instead of doing a "me too!" change
> >> in
> >> direction, we should stick to what we already did best. Call that
> >> artistic
> >> integrity of a sort.
> >>
> >> 2. In order to compete with what MTG already was, you had to have
> >> really,
> >> really high production values. If not, you'd fail immediately. We
> >> realized
> >> we did not have the money to completely change direction, put out all
> >> these slick, high-quality, cut-edge card stock things. Call that
> >> economic
> >> realism.
> >>
> >> So we went down. (and yes, there were other factors, but that was the
> >> final blow)
> >>
> >> Dave
> >>
> >>
> >> > I have two minds about my hobbies and the industries that make them.
> >> >
> >> > I recall well the time Dave refers to and with honest reflection back
> >> that
> >> > far gaming was a quaint sub culture hobby thing.
> >> >
> >> > When business folk figured out how much money there was to be made
> >> from
> >> > it,
> >> > that is when it became an industry. Obviously not over night or all at
> >> > once
> >> > but it did happen over a decade.
> >> >
> >> > I do not begrudge anyone trying to make a buck or lots of bucks, if
> >> > someone
> >> > thinks there is a market god bless go forth and try.
> >> >
> >> > But in the story of WotC/TSR circles it seems that a couple of key
> >> factors
> >> > play into this. While I am an outsider to both companies I live 15
> >> minutes
> >> > from WotC HQ in Seattle and over the years in Computer Games have
> >> worked
> >> > with designers and artists that have worked at both companies on and
> >> off.
> >> >
> >> > A couple of facts about them are clear and are pretty much undisputed
> >> by
> >> > former employees. WotC would not have been the beast it was without
> >> MTG
> >> > and
> >> > the Pokemon phenom that propelled CCGs into the craziness it because.
> >> This
> >> > level of widespread acceptance gave WotC the 'money' to basically curb
> >> > stomp competitors wholesale. Without the successful MGT they wouldn't
> >> be
> >> > the company they are today for good or ill.
> >> >
> >> > The corporate culture at WotC as odd as it sounds is controlled by
> >> their
> >> > R&D department because they created MTG originally. Because of this
> >> they
> >> > have been stuck in a rut for over a decade, at least imo.
> >> >
> >> > TSR for all its troubles simply failed to transition from a publishing
> >> > business model (making books) to a service model. Perhaps this is
> >> still a
> >> > struggle they experiencing today under WotC not so gentle 'eye of
> >> sauron".
> >> >
> >> > And while it may not of been indicative of the game industry back in
> >> the
> >> > day to have a 'competitor list' to crush its pretty common in other
> >> > industries where there is a lot of variety.
> >> >
> >> > And at the end of the day, business' are in it for the money otherwise
> >> > they
> >> > fold. We can have all the romantic thoughts we like but this however
> >> it
> >> is
> >> > the true in today's world.
> >> >
> >> > Its a sad state of affairs but its an inevitable truth of capitalism.
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 7:46 AM, <> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> **
> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> We got independent accounts from a number of people in the gaming
> >> >> "industry" that the WOTC staff were keeping a list of the other
> >> gaming
> >> >> companies they hoped to put out of business, and GDW was on it.
> >> >>
> >> >> If true, that sort of thinking was so foreign to the way the gaming
> >> >> "industry" ran it was ridiculous. We were all each other's biggest
> >> fans.
> >> >> One of the best things about the cons was getting together, seeing
> >> each
> >> >> other, trading copies of our newest games to each other, etc. The
> >> last
> >> >> thing any of us ever wanted was to put any one of us out of business.
> >> We
> >> >> did grate a little bit under "the 800 pound gorilla" of TSR, living
> >> in
> >> >> the
> >> >> shadow of their castle at the cons, but we all had friends working
> >> >> there.
> >> >> One of the reasons I took the "putting out of business list"
> >> seriously,
> >> >> aside from the fact that so many reputable people came to us with it
> >> >> (Mayfair, for example) is that it was so foreign to the thinking in
> >> the
> >> >> game "industry" that how would anyone even think to make that up?
> >> >>
> >> >> And that's when the game "industry" became the game industry. Might
> >> as
> >> >> well be working for Lockheed-Martin.ill
> >> >>
> >> >> "Brilliant Lances" was nominated for best SF boardgame of the year,
> >> but
> >> >> lost to MTG. The next year they had a new category for CCGs so they
> >> >> wouldn't beat boardgames in the boardgame category, but by then, MTGs
> >> >> and
> >> >> CCGs were beating down entire companies. And they eventually bought
> >> out
> >> >> the TSR castle.
> >> >>
> >> >> I may have said that before here, but I'm talking to lots of people,
> >> so
> >> >> I'm not sure.
> >> >>
> >> >> Dave
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> > If the world was fair then every bad thing that has ever happened to
> >> you
> >> > would have been deserved.
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > If the world was fair then every bad thing that has ever happened to you
> > would have been deserved.
> >
>
>

Yamagata Prefecture.

________________________________
From: Evyn MacDude
Sent: Wednesday, 20 June 2012, 11:25
Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Re: Question for the group


 

On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 6:33 AM, Eamon Watters <> wrote:

>
>
>Still in Japan, teaching English for my sins. 

Where abouts?--
Evyn

On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 10:52 PM, Eamon Watters <>wrote:

>
>
> Yamagata Prefecture.
>

Bit far to Hook you up with my younger brother who games, he teaches
University in Tokyo.
--
Evyn

Under ideal conditions on the expressway 5 hours might be do-able - though personally I doubt it.

Japan's premier acrobatic team is the Blue Impulse - and like the Red Arrows in the UK they are a fixture of the Air Show season.

For me JGSDF were a bit of a joke military wise up until March 11th 2011 - they are forbidden even to use force in defense of allies, but they did sterling work in the disaster. I'm sure they could cope with Godzilla now.

Eamon

________________________________
Sent: Thursday, 21 June 2012, 16:30
Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Re: Question for the group


 
That's funny. I used Google maps to do the route from Yamagata to Atsugi
and it said 5 hours or so, obviously not accounting for the low speed
limits. So much for the Almighty Google.

The Japanese have got a couple of aerobatic teams, maybe one might come
someplace in Kanagawa.

It's funny, as soon as you said JGSDF all I could think of was Godzilla's
foot stomping on model tanks.

> No contact - I live about 8 hours drive from Atsugi in Kanagawa, and a
> similar distance from Misawa in Aomori. We've low speed limits here, and
> the mountainous terrain leads to winding and vertigo-challenging roads in
> many places. I also heard it's hard to get onto US Bases now unless you're
> a citizen. It would be nice to see some 'heavy metal' in actions, but I
> have never been on base, or to an airshow, despite being an avid fan of
> military things that fly, sail, and roll. I guess you tend to get exposure
> to that kind of stuff at home, and whilst we got to see a whole range of
> copters in action Northern Ireland, air shows were rare.
>
> We do have a JGSDF base nearby though, hope to get there with my son if
> there's an open day.
>
>
> Eamon
>
>
> ________________________________
Sent: Wednesday, 20 June 2012, 23:35
Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Re: Question for the group
>
>
>
> Do you have any contact with the US naval aviation presence there? You
> live about as far from Atsugi as I used to live from Oceana, and I made
> their airshow every year. (Still do, I just have to fly now instead of
> drive.)
>
>> Yamagata Prefecture.
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>  From: Evyn MacDude <>
>> To:
>> Sent: Wednesday, 20 June 2012, 11:25
>> Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Re: Question for the group
>>
>>
>>  
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 6:33 AM, Eamon Watters
>> <>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Still in Japan, teaching English for my sins. 
>>
>> Where abouts?--
>> Evyn
>>
>>
>
>
>  
>

Read and the scales will fall from your eyes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shing%C5%8D,_Aomori#Tomb_of_Jesus_Christ

(Or perhaps you'll have a laugh or some other emotional reaction...)

________________________________
Sent: Thursday, 21 June 2012, 16:34
Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Re: Question for the group


 
Please, please, what is the story of Jesus' tomb?

I love stuff like how Jesus and Mary Magdalene ran of to Southern France,
and Jesus' bloodline has been preserved in blah, blah, whatever, and how
the Holy Grail ("san graal") is just misdirection for royal blood ("sang
real"), and this has to be MUCH better than that story, a little bit of
Mormonism 13th AWOL Tribe, some Thor Heyerdahl, etc.

> Did you get to see any of the Aomori/Tohoku festivals? I did a tour of
> them back in '04 and they certainly rocked. Even better was a winter
> festival in a small village in Iwate where the resident built a pyre of
> wood, loin-clothed men climbed on top - and the it was set on fire. They
> competed to see who would be the last to jump down, with the rest of the
> village throwing snow up to them to keep them cool. After that they used
> the still-glowing staves of wood to purify the local shrine by attacking
> it!
>
> Jesus's tomb, by local legend, is reputed to be in the Aomori/Iwate area
> too!
>
> Eamon
>
>
>>From: John Potter <>
>
>>I was on a joint command up Misawa, the base itself was Air Force. I was
>> part of the NSGA  (National Security Group 
>>Activity) as it was called back then. CTM (Cryptological Technician
>> - Maintenance) was my rating. 
>

Ho-lee crackers. The lengths that people will go to write themselves into
a narrative. Went to Japan TWICE, that's quite a deal. I like the way his
brother "casually took Christ's place," like they told him, "just hold our
place in line, we gotta run to the ATM. BRB."

I find it kind of endearing somehow, at least in retrospect. Watching it
in real time like "Real Housewives of ____" is a different experience.

> Read and the scales will fall from your eyes:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shing%C5%8D,_Aomori#Tomb_of_Jesus_Christ
>
> (Or perhaps you'll have a laugh or some other emotional reaction...)
>
>
>

>
>  
> Please, please, what is the story of Jesus' tomb?
>
> I love stuff like how Jesus and Mary Magdalene ran of to Southern France,
> and Jesus' bloodline has been preserved in blah, blah, whatever, and how
> the Holy Grail ("san graal") is just misdirection for royal blood ("sang
> real"), and this has to be MUCH better than that story, a little bit of
> Mormonism 13th AWOL Tribe, some Thor Heyerdahl, etc.
>
>>
>> Jesus's tomb, by local legend, is reputed to be in the Aomori/Iwate area
>> too!
>>
>> Eamon

Can take ironic consolation in the fact they were themselves
eaten up by Hasbro.


---
from my T989

I always wished micro machines would have done army builder
packs. I spent a bunch of money button every Abrams I could done
trying to build up a Tank Bn. I would have like Abrams available
in 4s and FSU t80, t72 in 3s for ex.
I do remember getting a set of F18 so they started to. I think
that was all Hasbro sincethey started doing with Star Wars figs,
too

---
from my T989