CT Errata Compendium

[kilemall]

That was my thought. The value doesn't match explanation or table, but the explanation and the table work together properly.

Edit: whup, spoke too soon. Table's giving me Cr100 times G-rating per kilogram for limited burn fuel instead of Cr200 times G-rating per kilogram.

Ok, 4G4 limited burn.

Casing mass 5+ 4 = 9kg
Casing cost 300 x 9 = 2700 Cr
Fuel Mass 4 kg
Fuel cost 200 x 4 x 4 = 3200 Cr

Cost = 5900 Cr

Listed propulsion system is 13 kg, but listed cost is 4300.

Hmmm, using your assumption of 100 as fuel multiplier, the costs work out.

So, check against limited burn 6G6, the biggest missile, yields 17 kg weight and 3300+7200=10,500 Cr. Table says 23 kg and same cost.

Boy, the errata needs errata.

 

[Axe]

LBB 1 page 41, The Traveller Book page 43, and Traveller Starter Edition, Rules Booklet page 25,:

Vacc suits are relatively bulky, and weigh 10 kilograms; the weight counts against personal weight allowances. This weight is reduced 2 kilograms per tech level as the suit gains increasing sophistication. For example, a TL 10 vacc suit weighs 6 kilograms, and a vacc suit at tech level 13+ adds no apparent weight.

The following is recommended:


BASIC TRAVELLER (301, 1981 edition)

CHARACTERS AND COMBAT (Book 1, 1981 edition)
Page 41, Armor and Protection (clarification): For consistency, the second sentence should read “The weight of personal armor and clothing is assumed to be part of the character’s clothing load and is not affected by the weight rule (except Vacc Suits below TL 13).”



THE TRAVELLER BOOK (201, 1982)
Page 43, Armor and Protection (clarification): For consistency, the second sentence should read “The weight of personal armor and clothing is assumed to be part of the character’s clothing load and is not affected by the weight rule (except Vacc Suits below TL 13).”
Page 44, Weapons and Equipment Table, Body Armor (Correction): Vacc Suit should not have an asterisk (*) in the weight column. A Vacc Suit’s weight does count against personal weight allowances (page 43)



STARTER TRAVELLER (251, 1983)
Rules Booklet:
Page 25, Armor and Protection (clarification): For consistency, the second sentence should read “The weight of personal armor and clothing is assumed to be part of the character’s clothing load and is not affected by the weight rule (except Vacc Suits below TL 13).”

Charts and Tables Booklet:
Page 4, Weapons and Equipment Table, Body Armor (Correction): Vacc Suit should not have an asterisk (*) in the weight column. A Vacc Suit’s weight does count against personal weight allowances (Rules Booklet page 25)

 

[Axe]

Merchant Capt. A. L. Jamison

BASIC TRAVELLER (301, 1981 edition)

CHARACTERS AND COMBAT (Book 1, 1981 edition)
Page 26, CHARACTER GENERATION EXAMPLE, Second Term (correction): A listed roll needs to be changed to match up with the ACQUIRED SKILLS TABLES (the tables were updated after Book 1, 1977 edition). The last sentence should read: “He goes on a physical fitness kick [Table 1, roll 3= +1 endurance] and learns to better defend himself [Table 2, roll 6= gun combat] using the small body pistol.”

Page 27, CHARACTER GENERATION EXAMPLE, Fourth Term (correction): A listed roll needs to be changed to match up with the ACQUIRED SKILLS TABLES (the tables were updated after Book 1, 1977 edition). The sentence regarding acquiring skills should read: “He trains himself in the martial arts [Table 1, roll 5= blade combat], choosing the cutlass and [Table 2, roll 6= gun combat] the submachinegun.”


THE TRAVELLER BOOK (201, 1982)

Page 31, MERCHANT CAPTAIN ALEXANDER JAMISON, Second Term (correction): A listed roll needs to be changed to match up with the ACQUIRED SKILLS TABLES (the tables were updated after Book 1, 1977 edition). The last sentence should read: “He goes on a physical fitness kick [Table 1, roll 3= +1 endurance] and learns to better defend himself [Table 2, roll 6= gun combat] using the small body pistol.”

Page 31, MERCHANT CAPTAIN ALEXANDER JAMISON, Fourth Term (correction): A listed roll needs to be changed to match up with the ACQUIRED SKILLS TABLES (the tables were updated after Book 1, 1977 edition). The sentence regarding acquiring skills should read: “He trains himself in the martial arts [Table 1, roll 5= blade combat], choosing the cutlass and [Table 2, roll 6= gun combat] the submachinegun.”


STARTER TRAVELLER (251, 1983)

Rules Booklet:
Page 18, MERCHANT CAPTAIN ALEXANDER JAMISON, Second Term (correction): A listed roll needs to be changed to match up with the ACQUIRED SKILLS TABLES (the tables were updated after Book 1, 1977 edition). The last sentence should read: “He goes on a physical fitness kick [Table 1, roll 3= +1 endurance] and learns to better defend himself [Table 2, roll 6= gun combat] using the small body pistol.”

Page 18, MERCHANT CAPTAIN ALEXANDER JAMISON, Fourth Term (correction): A listed roll needs to be changed to match up with the ACQUIRED SKILLS TABLES (the tables were updated after Book 1, 1977 edition). The sentence regarding acquiring skills should read: “He trains himself in the martial arts [Table 1, roll 5= blade combat], choosing the cutlass and [Table 2, roll 6= gun combat] the submachinegun.”

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Petty erratum:

Striker, Design Sequence Tables Booklet, p5:
Armor Ratings Table

AV 105 should be Mod 9390

(The formula is 5 × 2^(AV-18)/8 (for AV≥14), rounded to three significant numbers.)

 

[Kakistocrat]

status as of February 2020?

DonM is an 'absent friend', so I don't know how much more effort is being put into this officially.

I take it that (at this writing) no one has taken up Don’s mantle to continue to maintain the consolidated CT errata?

Looking within the errata document, its PDF format seems to have been a “target” format, exported from a “source” document in Microsoft Word 2010. Does anyone know if the Word version of the errata document is available for updating?

 

[Dolphin in a Robot Suit]

Question: In the errata doc, it is stated several times that the lab space in the Type L lab ship costs 0.2MCr/ton to build. In what book is this information found? Couldn't find it in Book 2, High Guard, TTB or Death Station. Was this one of DonM's house rules that somehow made it into the errata? o:

 

[aramis]

Question: In the errata doc, it is stated several times that the lab space in the Type L lab ship costs 0.2MCr/ton to build. In what book is this information found? Couldn't find it in Book 2, High Guard, TTB or Death Station. Was this one of DonM's house rules that somehow made it into the errata? o:

It has to be reverse engineered. Don rounded down, I argued for 2.4

Don, Cryton, and I all worked backwards to find out the nonstandard costs.
List price is 158.98, after 10% off, so ×10/9 gives 176.6444

400 hull	0	16
JDD	25	40
MDC	5	12
PPF	19	48
wasted Drv. Spc	1	0
fuel 90	90	0
model 2	2	9
20 SR	80	10
2 HP	2	0.2
2 A/R	8	1.2
1 Pinnace	40	20
lab space	85	¿x?
subtotal	85	156.4

[tc=3] [/tc]

that leaves 20.24444, for 85 lab tons 0.238 per ton
So, adding 85 at 0.2= 17, thus 173.4, reduced for standard, 156.06

Note that Don's argument for rounding down was to match later editions.
So the extra MCr 2.22 can be assumed to be some other system.

Likewise, the mining ship, and safari ship can be reverse engineered to find the costs of those non-standard systems.

 

[Dolphin in a Robot Suit]

Ah, smart. Thanks aramis.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

You leave out the cost of the bridge. Only MCr 15.89 is unaccounted for or ~0.187 MCr/Dt lab.

Note that the amount of fuel is incorrect, probably taken from the S4 (LBB2'77) version.

Note that I don't give double standard rebates to small craft or vehicles. The Pinnace is already rebated for standard design at MCr 20 and should not be rebated further.

LL-4421321-000000-00000-0        MCr 159         400 Dton
bearing                                            Crew=5
batteries                                           TL=11
                 Pass=15 Cargo=3 Fuel=110 EP=12 Agility=1

Single Occupancy    LBB2 design                     3       174,3
                                     USP    #     Dton       Cost
Hull, Part Streaml     400 Dt          4          400            
Configuration       Close Structur     4                     16  

Engineering                                         1            
Jump Drive          D                  2    1      25        40  
Manoeuvre D         C                  1    1       5        12  
Power Plant         F                  3    1      19        48  
Fuel, #J, #weeks    J-2, 4 weeks            2     110            
                                                                 
Bridge                                      1      20         2  
Computer            m/2                2    1       2         9  
                                                                 
Staterooms                                 20      80        10  
Lab Space                                          85        15,9
                                                                 
Cargo                                               3            
                                                                 
Empty hardpoint                             2       2         0,2
                                                                 
Pinnace             40 Dton                 1      40        20  
Air/raft            4 Dton                  2       8         1,2
                                                                 
Nominal Cost        MCr 174,29           Sum:       3       174,3
Class Cost          MCr  16,84          Valid      ≥0          ≥0
[B]Ship Cost           MCr 158,98[/B]

The ship description only says that "An additional 85 tons are available within the ship for use as lab space." It does not say anything about any lab equipment or furnishings being included in the price.

The base price (not standard) without any cost for lab space would be MCr 158.4, quite close to the specified MCr 158.98. (As close as with the approximated lab cost.)

LL-4421321-000000-00000-0        MCr 158         400 Dton
bearing                                            Crew=5
batteries                                           TL=11
                 Pass=15 Cargo=3 Fuel=110 EP=12 Agility=1

Single Occupancy    LBB2 design                     3       158,4
                                     USP    #     Dton       Cost
Hull, Part Streaml     400 Dt          4          400            
Configuration       Close Structur     4                     16  

Engineering                                         1            
Jump Drive          D                  2    1      25        40  
Manoeuvre D         C                  1    1       5        12  
Power Plant         F                  3    1      19        48  
Fuel, #J, #weeks    J-2, 4 weeks            2     110            
                                                                 
Bridge                                      1      20         2  
Computer            m/2                2    1       2         9  
                                                                 
Staterooms                                 20      80        10  
Lab Space                                          85            
                                                                 
Cargo                                               3            
                                                                 
Empty hardpoint                             2       2         0,2
                                                                 
Pinnace             40 Dton                 1      40        20  
Air/raft            4 Dton                  2       8         1,2
                                                                 
Nominal Cost        MCr 158,40           Sum:       3       158,4
Class Cost          MCr  15,09          Valid      ≥0          ≥0
Ship Cost           MCr 144,68

How the designers actually counted is anybody's guess...
(The LBB2'77 version in S4 is probably made with installed labs at 0.2 MCr/Dt, but not using a standard hull for some reason?)

 

[aramis]

Knew I was forgetting something!
It's the process. That's also why it was Don, Cryton, and Myself, all crunching the numbers. We caught each others' mistakes.
I know a fourth person was involved, but not who.

 

[Matt123]

That might have been me. We were chatting before he passed and he was interested in using my shipbuilding tool which captured current errata. In addition I had created versions of the main CT ships, with references to their multiple sources.

That's not to suggest he actually used it (he may have), at the time I assumed the discussions would move to ensuring the tool reflected the errata. I believe it already did a good job of that but Don I felt wanted more eyes on it to improve confidence.

The discussion was slow moving and unfortunately never completed.

 

[daryen]

Thread revive!

After searching around for the latest version of the CT Consolidated Errata, I found this thread and the file in the first message. Definitely interesting and nice to see a couple of my retcon suggestions were accepted.

However, I have a question around one of the last changes. It appears that Aramis was demoted from being the subsector capital of the Aramis subsector. So, I have two questions on that single item:
1) Why was Aramis demoted? That was a very distinct point of random background information in the TTA, and the world hosts a full-on Marquis and everything. Sure the world is underwhelming (as are lots of others), but it seems an odd change.
2) Which world is now the subsector capital? One of the defining things about the Imperial bureaucracy is that rules are always followed, no matter how stupid or pointless. Aramis is a subsector of the Imperium, and therefore must have a subsector capital. Which world is that now?

Thanks!

 

[Spinward Flow]

Near as I can tell, based on the precedents ... subsector capitals MUST be on the Express Boat Network routes.
There are no exceptions to this "rule" in the Spinward Marches.

There also seems to be a "bias" towards type A starports along XBoat Routes within a subsector for the choice of subsector capital.

In the Aramis subsector, there is only one mainworld that meets both of those criteria ... Aramis/Aramis.

The only "real" competitor that Aramis/Aramis might have within the bounds of the Aramis subsector would be Junidy/Aramis with its massive population (code: A). However, the racial tensions (and terrorism) with the native minor race, plus the relative proximity to the Vargr, makes Junidy a less than ideal location for a subsector capital (the Amber Zone code doesn't help either).

All of that said, I can easily imagine that Aramis/Aramis might be "demoted" from a subsector capital at some point so as to divide the responsibilities for administering the subsector between Regina/Regina, Rhylanor/Rhylanor and Praetoria/Praetoria in an attempt to consolidate administration closer to their respective Express Boat Routes into/near the subsector.

 

[Silverhawk]

Not sure who thought that Aramis was demoted. It is still marked as a subsection capital on TravellerMap.

 

[Spartan159]

For a while it was not. Then some people pointed it out and it got restored.

 

[Silverhawk]

For a while it was not. Then some people pointed it out and it got restored.

I see. Must have happened while I wasn't looking.

 

[daryen]

To be clear, I am only stated what was, and still is, in the CT Consolidated Errata file attached to the first post of this topic. It is an officially endorsed document on an officially endorsed website and was made by an officially endorsed author. Therefore, it would seem to be rather officially endorsed. So, whatever is shown on TravellerMaps is rather irrelevant to my question.

That said, I don't know what was done in T5, which I imagine is the last word on things like this.

And, again, I still have no idea why that would have been retconned. So, I'll be keeping that item under advisement until I see a good reason for it.

 

[aramis]

Not sure who thought that Aramis was demoted. It is still marked as a subsection capital on TravellerMap.

There are two worlds name Aramis in the Marches. Aramis/Aramis (Marches 3510) and Aramis/Trin's Veil (Marches 2540).

Aramis/Aramis being the SS Capital is a very suboptimal choice... it's in the rimward trailing corner. But it is the canonical capital of the SS in the classic/rebellion/regency era.

Trin/Trin's Veil is less bad... and Aramis/Trin's Veil would be worse...

 

[daryen]

To be clear, I am only talking about Aramis/Aramis. The other one is irrelevant to my question.

And suboptimal or not, there aren't really any other choices. The Aramis subsector is a pretty deep backwater region that is dominated by the subsectors on either side of it.

But, a subsector is a subsector, and every subsector in the Imperium needs a capitol, whether it makes sense or not. If not Aramis, which world is the capitol?

 

[aramis]

To be clear, I am only talking about Aramis/Aramis. The other one is irrelevant to my question.

Some (usually new-to-traveller) click the wrong one on Travellermap or find the wrong one in S3... Heck, some of us even accidentally hit the wrong one due to the search interface.

And suboptimal or not, there aren't really any other choices. The Aramis subsector is a pretty deep backwater region that is dominated by the subsectors on either side of it.

But, a subsector is a subsector, and every subsector in the Imperium needs a capitol, whether it makes sense or not. If not Aramis, which world is the capitol?

Nasemin (SM 3003 B-98A422–B S G Green)_ is on a trace holding just shy of half (11) of the subsector's worlds, and is central, and on the X-boat system.
Junidy (SM 3202 B-434ABD–B W - Amber) is on the same trace as Nasemin,is importance 4, and while at the end of the trace, still better for the majority of the subsector. Also on the X-Boat system.

)It's worth noting as well: Aramis (SM 3110 A-5A0556–B B P Green) is only Importance 2. It's on an 8 world trace that has only 2 in the Aramis Subsector.

Given the revisions to Travellermap data, the Marquis gets bumped to a SS Duke... But Junidy is a duchy as well. A sane government would have flexible lines; a semi-sane one would move the capital. But, as is often the case in the real world, moving capitals is often fraught with both politician opposition (often said to be grounded in having extra-marital partners at the capital), local opposition at the old capital (loss fo revenue), local opposition at the new capital (often involving excess traffic, land prices, and corruption)...