Classic Traveller: The Lost Rules

[Supplement Four]

Didn't LKW comment on the 1-G issue at some point, and wasn't there an in-house work-around?

He did. And he supported the Striker rule (that you need 1G to stay afloat and 1G for maneuver). And, this is why he designed his ships the way he did.

I'm trying to find the e-mail he sent me on this issue, but I think it got lost during my last computer change. Wish I could show it to Mike Wightman, though.

Specifically, where did the term "contragravity" enter the Trav lexicon? Wasn't it somehow pre-MT, and therefore CT/BT?

I'm thinking that term was first used in TNE, but I'm not sure.

 

[Coffee]

It may have been in the original Traveller rules--the 1977 edition (not many copies of it were printed), back when there were modifiers to damage and sensors didn't use the metric system.

I have the '77 edition.

Now I'm curious about how many copies were printed. Does anyone have any info on that?

I ask because I have the 9th printing of Book 1, the 2nd printing of Book 2, and the 6th printing of Book 3. All first edition, though, copyright 1977. (I picked them each up, used, at different times.)

 

[mike wightman]

Is it, or is it not in Striker?

It is.

It's written there.

Striker is a CT supplement.

It's in CT.

Mayday is also a CT game, and it contradicts Striker.

And the statement you keep coming back to was that there was a rule in the basic set - there isn't, there never has been.

And, it shows itself in other areas--the ones I pointed out (and I think there are other references, I'm just not recalling them atm).

That's because they are other people's house rules- not CT rules.

Why do you think the B&W printing in Striker doesn't count?

Because the rule in Striker is contradicted by the rule in Mayday and simple physics.

Why do you think LKW made his plans the way he did?

Because he's based them on his interpretation of rules - they are his house rules if you like and not therefore part of canon.

Why do you think Andy Slack wrote an article about it?

Again based on his house rules, interpretations, bias, lack of physics, but definitely not canon.

ALL of these people are wrong? Right? And, Mike Wightman is absolutely correct?

Yes, I am absolutely correct.

There is no rule in LBB1-3 any edition that says ships are restricted by maneuver drive rating from taking off and landing on worlds based on their size.

It's not in any printed edition of any version of CT.

The rule in Striker is wrong, simple as that.

Nope.

And you have to be right?

I'll double that. AAAARRRRGGGGHHHH!!!!

Why is it so hard for you to accept that the rule existed, and now its gone?

Because it isn't in any of the many rulesets I own, and I have an awful lot of Traveller rulesets. 3 sets of 1977 , 3 x 1981, TTB, ST.

Oh yeah, everybody else is wrong. Mike is right. Got it.

Good, at last you understand.

 

[far-trader]

I have the '77 edition.

Now I'm curious about how many copies were printed. Does anyone have any info on that?

I ask because I have the 9th printing of Book 1, the 2nd printing of Book 2, and the 6th printing of Book 3. All first edition, though, copyright 1977. (I picked them each up, used, at different times.)

Since this thread is pretty much now toast for anything besides the latest brand new flame fest of "does 1G get anywhere" I'll happily answer this though it'll probably get lost in the noise...

1977 Basic Traveller had 12 print runs with a total of 64,320 units.

for comparison:

1981 Revised Traveller had 8 print runs with a total of 72410 units.

1981 Deluxe Traveller had 6 print runs with a total of 37,882 units.

 

[Coffee]

Since this thread is pretty much now toast for anything besides the latest brand new flame fest of "does 1G get anywhere" I'll happily answer this though it'll probably get lost in the noise...

1977 Basic Traveller had 12 print runs with a total of 64,320 units.

for comparison:

1981 Revised Traveller had 8 print runs with a total of 72410 units.

1981 Deluxe Traveller had 6 print runs with a total of 37,882 units.

Thanks for the info; I appreciate it.

So, are Books 1, 2 and 3 from Deluxe Traveller different from the ones in the Revised edition?

I no longer have my original Revised edition books, but I just won some on ebay that appear to be from the Deluxe edition. I assumed they'd be the exact same book, but now you've put some doubt in my mind...

 

[mike wightman]

The books in Deluxe edition are the 1981 revised version.

 

[far-trader]

As Mike notes the basic books are identical in both Revised and Deluxe. The difference was Deluxe came with Book 0, Adventure 0, a map of the Spinward Marches, and some other goodies.

 

[Coffee]

Thanks.

I'm getting Book 0 and Adventure 0, that's why I assumed it was from the Deluxe edition.

Not getting the map of the Marches, but I probably won't miss it.

And I don't know what the "other goodies" are, but I probably won't miss them, either.

But when I do get them, I'll have the first edition, second edition, Traveller book, and Starter set. So I'll be able to compare all four for myself, something I've long wanted to do.

 

[mike wightman]

If you can get hold of 1st edition High Guard reasonably, then do so. There are some real gems in there.

 

[aramis]

Striker is a separate game, not a CT supplement.

 

[aramis]

As Mike notes the basic books are identical in both Revised and Deluxe. The difference was Deluxe came with Book 0, Adventure 0, a map of the Spinward Marches, and some other goodies.

Mine had no "other goodies", when I opened the shrink Dec 26, 1983.

It was Bks 0-3, Adv 0, and the big map. That's it. Note that Adv0 included the data for the marches as an appendix, as well as a JTAS-style Zhodani CGen sketch.

 

[far-trader]

Mine had no "other goodies", when I opened the shrink Dec 26, 1983.

Just going by the publication blurb

... Note that Adv0 included the data for the marches as an appendix, as well as a JTAS-style Zhodani CGen sketch.

Maybe that's what the blurb was referring to? No cheap pair of white D6? I seem to recall that, but could easily be wrong and thinking of the Starter set or some other game. So many boxed games of that time came with the dice.

 

[aramis]

Oh, yeah.. the dice. 2 of the typically crappy GDW 12mm d6's.

I always forget those horrid little unbalanced dice.

 

[Allensh]

Quite some time ago I ordered what was advertised as the 1981 edition of the Traveller boxed set (Books 1-3) from an online vendor of used games. what I actually GOT was Book 0 and the 1977 version of the books 1-3, 12th printing (I think).

EDIT: Just looked and the last number listed in the sequence of numbers on the inside front cover of all three books is 25! Does that mean its the 25th printing??

Allen

 

[BlackBat242]

EDIT: Just looked and the last number listed in the sequence of numbers on the inside front cover of all three books is 25! Does that mean its the 25th printing??
Allen

Yes, it should... if they were following standard publishing practice.

 

[aramis]

Quite some time ago I ordered what was advertised as the 1981 edition of the Traveller boxed set (Books 1-3) from an online vendor of used games. what I actually GOT was Book 0 and the 1977 version of the books 1-3, 12th printing (I think).

EDIT: Just looked and the last number listed in the sequence of numbers on the inside front cover of all three books is 25! Does that mean its the 25th printing??

Allen

Look for the lowest number on the list; that's the printing number.

 

[deniable]

The lowest number is the current printing. The highest number is an expected maximum printing. IIRC, this is so that they can cover up the lower print run numbers without having to reset the page.

 

[Allensh]

Ok, that means that they are all 12th printing then, since the numbers run from 12 to 25.

One observation: in some ways, the damage numbers for weapons in the 1977 version are closer to what Mongoose uses than the 1981 and later versions were...makes me wonder if they used the 1977 version for reference...

in any event, if anyone wants some nice condition copies of the final printing of Traveller's original edition, PM me

Allen

 

[GypsyComet]

Since this has come up elsewhere and I've already types it...

RANK AND SERVICE
Some skills accrue to a character automatically (without the necessity of throwing for them, and without using up eligibility) by virtue of a specific service or a specific rank. The rank and service skills table indicates the specific eligibilities which result in these acquisitions. These skills are acquired in addition to those presently held, and add to expertise levels in the normal manner. This table should be consulted during each term of service, and the skills added to the character as soon as he becomes eligible for them.

(Book 1, First Edition, Fifth Printing, copyright 1977; page 23)


The bolded bit is absent from later "editions" of CT, including TTB and the FFE reprints.

 

[far-trader]

That seems pretty clear. And before someone jumps in with "Well that wasn't carried over to edition x... " there are other examples of dropped clarifications that lead me to believe that they are simply editing and/or formatting errors and not a deliberate attempt to change the rules. But that may just be me and a few others