CT Errata Compendium

[DonM]

Hello Donald McKinney Keeper of Traveller Errata,

I believe that Consolidated CT Errata version .07 page 31 entry for Missiles in Traveller (JTAS #21, Special Supplement 3, 1984) concerning the Page 3, Missile Identification correction needs a correction to the propulsion system.

Per Consolidated CT Errata:

"A 5G6 continuous burn (36 kg, Cr 3,600, TL 8).... missile, costing Cr 5,600 and massing 48 kg."

The following are the calculations I've made:


01. Model 5G6 max acceleration = 5G with fuel for a Burn of 6

Continuous Burn Casing Mass = G = 5 kg
Continuous Burn Casing Cost = 100 x Casing Mass = 100 x 5 = Cr 500
Fuel Mass = Burns x G = 6 x 5 = 30
Fuel Cost = 100 x Fuel Mass = 100 x 30 = Cr 3,000

Specification:
5G6 continuous burn propulsion system (35 kg, Cr 3,500, TL 8).

The corrected Continuous Burn Propulsion System Table entry on errata page 32 cross references from the Burn 6 row to the 5G columns as 35 and 3500 which appears to support the calculations made using the equations.

On the topic CT Special Supplement 3 Missiles & Consolidated CT Errata Piper indicated that the missile appeared to be 6G6. Unless my math is way off I don't believe the missile in the example is using a 6G6 system.

02. Model 6G6 max acceleration = 6G with fuel for a Burn of 6

Continuous Burn Casing Mass = G = 6 kg
Continuous Burn Casing Cost = 100 x Casing Mass = 100 x 6 = Cr 600
Fuel Mass = Burns x G = 6 x 6 = 36
Fuel Cost = 100 x Fuel Mass = 100 x 36 = Cr 3,600

Specification:
6G6 continuous burn propulsion system (42 kg, Cr4,200, TL 8).

The errata's corrected table numbers for a 6G6 propulsion system match the numbers

03.Model 6G5 max acceleration = 6G with fuel for a Burn of 5

Continuous Burn Casing Mass = G = 6 kg
Continuous Burn Casing Cost = 100 x Casing Mass = 100 x 6 = Cr 600
Fuel Mass = Burns x G = 6 x 5 = 30
Fuel Cost = 100 x Fuel Mass = 100 x 30 = Cr 3,000

Specification:
6G5 continuous burn propulsion system (36 kg, Cr 3,600, TL 8).

My third comparison with the corrected continuous burn propulsion system matched. Adding the specifications of the other missile components with a 6G5 continuous burn propulsion system results in a "missile, costing Cr 5,600 and massing 48 kg."

Recommendations:

1. Change 5G6 to 6G5, this way only two items change.

2. Change (36 kg, Cr 3,600, TL) to (35 kg, Cr 3,500, TL 8) and "missile, costing Cr 5,600 and massing 48 kg." to "missile, costing Cr 5,500 and massing 47 kg."

Actually, can you confirm that this all matches up to the 2011 revision of Special Supplement 3 re-released by FFE? The 1984 edition of SS3 has been replaced.

Back story: In 1986, a fan asked Marc a bunch of questions about SS3, and Marc sent him an extensive response, which largely replaced the whole work... but SS3 was never updated, and when Marc left GDW in 1990 the errata was lost -- until uploaded as a set of images by the fan who had received it. At the same time in 2011, I was trying to find a good proof of concept for the idea of redoing the CT materials in pure PDF (not scans, but rebuilt completely), and used the errata as a justification for the attempt.

So if this errata is derived from the published errata plus the original SS3, it might actually still be wrong. You need to work from the new SS3, and I haven't updated the compiled errata because it would almost mean putting the whole SS3-R into the errata document.

 

[BytePro]

... At the same time in 2011, I was trying to find a good proof of concept for the idea of redoing the CT materials in pure PDF (not scans, but rebuilt completely), and used the errata as a justification for the attempt.

Did anything come of this?

Recently began re-typesetting my LBBs for custom use. Besides being crisp and editable, such can be cropped and scaled optimally for modern devices - retina iPod, iPad-mini, high-res portrait display and two-up widescreen, in my cases. Aside from obvious printing advantages, it also facilitates alternate colorings such as light on dark for night reading.

Started with S12 Forms & Charts - that being the most challenging to 'exactly' match, and doubly useful in PDF. Using direct PostScript to match up as precisely as desired and handle the versions of Univers and Optima, along with the manual kerning, of the originals. While not WYSIWYG, extremely simple code edits and the entire document's look and layout can be changed - supporting custom margins, spacing, fonts, colors, etc. PDF fill-able forms and Javascript for inline creation are a cool bonus.

Haven't pursued this too far - as its just for my own personal use. Certainly would be advantageous for errata, not to mention offering much smaller, more legible and better scalable PDFs than scans offer.​

 

[Jacqual]

That would be very nice, having a copy of CT with everything corrected. Even if it was just LBB 1-3, I would even order a hardcopy of that well maybe 4 or 5 copies of that in Hardcopy.

 

[snrdg082102]

Morning DonM,

Thanks for the prompt reply and new information.

Actually, can you confirm that this all matches up to the 2011 revision of Special Supplement 3 re-released by FFE? The 1984 edition of SS3 has been replaced.

Unfortunately, all I have is the Consolidated CT Errata v .07 dated 06/01/12 and FFE 007 JTAS Issues 13-24 from 2002.

Where can I purchase and what is the price for the updated SS3?

Back story: In 1986, a fan asked Marc a bunch of questions about SS3, and Marc sent him an extensive response, which largely replaced the whole work... but SS3 was never updated, and when Marc left GDW in 1990 the errata was lost -- until uploaded as a set of images by the fan who had received it. At the same time in 2011, I was trying to find a good proof of concept for the idea of redoing the CT materials in pure PDF (not scans, but rebuilt completely), and used the errata as a justification for the attempt.

So if this errata is derived from the published errata plus the original SS3, it might actually still be wrong. You need to work from the new SS3, and I haven't updated the compiled errata because it would almost mean putting the whole SS3-R into the errata document.

Would slipping in a reference to SS3-R in the next update to the Consolidated CT Errata be a good compromise since the original SS3 errata is still in the document?

Or did I miss the reference about SS3 being revised?

On a similar note have the missile design rules in Mayday been revised too?

If not then there appears to be a difference between the Mayday Missile Design Rules and the correction for Mayday's standard missile example.

Drat, I placed my topic Consolidated CT Errata v .07 for Mayday in the main forum instead of here.

Basically the correction to the Standard Mayday missile changed the propulsion system from limited to constant with a homing guidance system. Per the Guidance-Propulsion Systems Compatibility Table a missile with a constant acceleration propulsion system cannot have a homing guidance system.

 

[DonM]

Hmm... I thought it once was posted as a moot perk, but that's the Lost Rules supplement. And it's not up on DriveThruRPG. So, I'm going to have to ask the boss what happened to that. Ok, ignore everything I wrote about SS3-R for now.

:rofl:

 

[aramis]

Hmm... I thought it once was posted as a moot perk, but that's the Lost Rules supplement. And it's not up on DriveThruRPG. So, I'm going to have to ask the boss what happened to that. Ok, ignore everything I wrote about SS3-R for now.

:rofl:

It still is posted in the moot spire, in a sticky.
New Moot Benefit: Lost Rules of Traveller

You might need to set it to show older threads...

I'd turn off the "hide threads older than X" option if I didn't think a few people would hunt me down for it...

 

[snrdg082102]

Hello DonM,

Hmm... I thought it once was posted as a moot perk, but that's the Lost Rules supplement. And it's not up on DriveThruRPG. So, I'm going to have to ask the boss what happened to that. Ok, ignore everything I wrote about SS3-R for now.

:rofl:

I'm going to have to dug-up the funds to join the moot to see what I'm missing. I'm not going to forget about the revision since I would like to see the updates, however I'll plod along with what I have until further notice.

Thanks again for the update and all the other stuff you do.

 

[DonM]

Marc just looked. SS3-R and the Lost Rules (Special Supplement 4, who knew!) are both on the updated CT CD, and SS4 is available to Moot members as a perk for nobility.

Aramis: I knew that SS4 was in the Spire, but I wasn't sure if SS3-R was there, and it isn't. At the moment, the only way to get SS3-R is to have an updated CT CD from FFE.

Tom: Drop me a direct e-mail about SS3-R, and we'll see about how your current findings fit into the revision, and if that means amending SS3-R, and then how the updated SS3-R fits into the errata.

This is my own fault for thinking "Hey, this book has a bunch of errata. That makes it a good candidate for rebuilding!". On the other hand, that led to us rebuilding the '77 books, which is the version of '77 that is on the CT CD (that's right -- the '77 books on the updated CT are rebuilds, NOT scans).

 

[snrdg082102]

Morning DonM,

Marc just looked. SS3-R and the Lost Rules (Special Supplement 4, who knew!) are both on the updated CT CD, and SS4 is available to Moot members as a perk for nobility.

The CDs are on my wish list of future purchases.

Aramis: I knew that SS4 was in the Spire, but I wasn't sure if SS3-R was there, and it isn't. At the moment, the only way to get SS3-R is to have an updated CT CD from FFE.

Looks like I'm really going to have to spring for a membership.

Tom: Drop me a direct e-mail about SS3-R, and we'll see about how your current findings fit into the revision, and if that means amending SS3-R, and then how the updated SS3-R fits into the errata.

Okay, I'll drop any other findings between SS3 and errata version 0.7 for comparison to SS3-R to you through e-mail. So far the only item I found was the Page 3, Missile Identification, second paragraph (correction) that a TL 8 5G6 continuous burn propulsion system specification are 36 kg and cost Cr 3,600.

This is my own fault for thinking "Hey, this book has a bunch of errata. That makes it a good candidate for rebuilding!". On the other hand, that led to us rebuilding the '77 books, which is the version of '77 that is on the CT CD (that's right -- the '77 books on the updated CT are rebuilds, NOT scans).

Let's see, you are juggling stuff in the real world - like taking care of the family, manage ct-starships, are the official CT/MT/TNE keeper of errata, moderate several COTI forums, the official archivist for DGP, and are a minion of T5. With that on your plate I can't see any fault with anything at least this way people without a clue, like me, get updated a little bit.

Have I said thank you and mentioned you're doing a fantastic job lately, if not my apologies.

 

[DonM]

And no, I'm probably NOT going to get either SS3-R2 or another errata version reviewed by Marc shortly.

T5 is upon us. Lock the doors, hide the beer...
:file_21:

 

[snrdg082102]

Alien Module 3: Vargr

Hello Donald McKinney,

While going through the Alien Module 3: Vargr copyright 1984 I think I may have found a small problem with the punctuation marks found on page 26.

Both (the query) and (the aside) use two unshaded boxes for punctuating a sentence. Based on the two shaded boxes for (the stop) and a single shaded box for (the half-stop or pause) I would recommend the (the aside) should be changed to a single unshaded box.

 

[cuTTer]

Daggers

Current errata (v0.7) for Book 1 (1981) states the short range modifier for dagger should be +2, not -1.

Same errata (v0.7) for The Traveller Book (1982) states the short range modifier for dagger should be -1, not +2.

 

[DonM]

Hello Donald McKinney,

While going through the Alien Module 3: Vargr copyright 1984 I think I may have found a small problem with the punctuation marks found on page 26.

Both (the query) and (the aside) use two unshaded boxes for punctuating a sentence. Based on the two shaded boxes for (the stop) and a single shaded box for (the half-stop or pause) I would recommend the (the aside) should be changed to a single unshaded box.

Trying to figure this one out. As I'm no linguist, I'd prefer more opinions on this one?

 

[DonM]

Current errata (v0.7) for Book 1 (1981) states the short range modifier for dagger should be +2, not -1.

Same errata (v0.7) for The Traveller Book (1982) states the short range modifier for dagger should be -1, not +2.

Oh nuts. Ok, we'll get that fixed.

 

[DonM]

Ok, I've got a 0.8 version of the errata, hope to post by the end of the week. This version will include the lost Imperium errata...

 

[snrdg082102]

Morning DonM,

Trying to figure this one out. As I'm no linguist, I'd prefer more opinions on this one?

I'm not a linguist either but comparing document on pages 24-25 with the translation on pages 44-45 of Alien Module 3: Vargr copyright 1984 appear to support the guess that (the aside) is a single open box/square.

Page 44:The underlined text from:
"The sergeant at the gate was rudely sending the wander on his way when the prince noticed and intervened. "Are you a starfarer?" he asked (for in those days, starfarers were still a rarity.) appears to be the translation for the following text on Page 24:

{single unshaded square/box} fa gnoull tasorz {single shaded square/box} vonutoe vargrz sathoendes ikoth zhatu {single unshaded square/box} and {two shaded squares/boxes}

From pages 22-23 and 26:
{single unshaded square/box} is not listed as punctuation on page 26, however the text detailing that (the aside) translates as parentheses and if I correlated the sections of the two documents correctly then the punctuation symbol shown on page 27 should be a single unshaded square/box.

fa = in

gnoull = those

tasorz = days (page 26 Nouns are made plural by the addition of z to the end of the word. If the word ends in a vowel, add rz instead. For example, taso means day, and tasorz means days.)

{single shaded square/box} is identified as (the half stop or pause) per page 26 translates to a comma

vonutoe = star

vargrz = vargrs (page 26 Nouns are made plural by the addition of z to the end of the word. If the word ends in a vowel, add rz instead. For example, taso means day, and tasorz means days.)

sathoendes = not listed

ikoth = still

zhatu = rarity

{single unshaded square/box} is not listed as punctuation on page 26

{two shaded squares/boxes} is listed as (the stop which translates, per page 26, as a period.

If I am correct that the cited text on page 24 is the same as the translation on page 44 then (the aside) appears to be represented as a single unshaded square/box.

Hope the above helps, unfortunately I haven't figured out how to show the actual punctuation.

 

[Carlobrand]

A minor but persistent bug came to mind recently about the cost of small craft under Book 2. Namely, the little things are way too expensive.

Daring to mix apples and oranges for a brief moment, High Guard version of the little dears with similar stats cost only a third to a half what their Book-2 counterparts cost, while the starships are ending up costing more. To get boats costing the same, you need to use low tech power plants and end up with boats that don't carry as much, therefore not comparable.

Sticking purely to the Book-2 universe, we've got a 50 dT 4G cutter - basically a hull with a bridge, plants and drives - that costs almost as much as a 100 dT jump-2 starship. You could almost build the thing from the rules: a Power Plant A and a Maneuver A would give the same performance in a 50 dT shell and leave just as much space for cargo, and the drive/plant pair costs only MCr12, which means that the bridge and hull of that little beastie's costing MCr16. If you pull the same trick with the 40 dT pinnace - Model A's in a 40 dT frame to pull 5Gs - you're left with 8 million to pay for hull and bridge. Mind you, this is for something considered to be standard.

Meanwhile, the 100 dT scout's standard hull is only costing MCr2, and would still only cost MCr2 even if we yanked out the jump drive and put in a 6G Maneuver-C/Power-Plant-C combination. And, it's bridge is a mere half a megacredit.

Can we consider revising the Book-2 costs for the boats?

 

[snrdg082102]

CT Alien Module 3 Vargr Language

Morning DonM,

I'm comparing the vocabulary listed with the text on pages 24-25 and so far found nineteen items not listed.

I have also found one or two possible typos one item is that in the vocabulary page the vargr word for starfarer is vonutoevargr, while the text on pages 24-25 show the word as vonutoe vargr.

Should I get a list together and send you the information via email so that you can have other's review them?

 

[DonM]

Morning DonM,

I'm comparing the vocabulary listed with the text on pages 24-25 and so far found nineteen items not listed.

I have also found one or two possible typos one item is that in the vocabulary page the vargr word for starfarer is vonutoevargr, while the text on pages 24-25 show the word as vonutoe vargr.

Should I get a list and send you the information via email so that you can have other's review them?

Yes. I suspect that this will not go into the errata (I'm very close to another CT errata release) for the next one, but we will figure it out. Perhaps we may learn something new about Vargr languages.

 

[snrdg082102]

Morning DonM,

Yes. I suspect that this will not go into the errata (I'm very close to another CT errata release) for the next one, but we will figure it out. Perhaps we may learn something new about Vargr languages.

I didn't really expect the material I find on the Vargr language to make the errata compendium anytime soon. Heck, I've only checked the first eighteen or nineteen lines on page 24.