EA4 going into Elibrary

[Psion]

Greetings,

You may be perfectly aware of / working on this, but EA4, while "out" and buyable, is not accessible from the e-library yet for me to grab with my subscription. I am hoping it will be available soon? I just happen to be running a game near that region tonight and would like to analyze it for possibilities of hooks to plant, so I am chomping at the bit...

 

[Flynn]

Woohoo! Congrats to Michael Taylor, for his first EA becoming available.

-Flynn

 

[Psion]

Originally posted by Flynn:
Woohoo! Congrats to Michael Taylor, for his first EA becoming available.

Er, not to downplay any congratulations, but...
http://www.travellerrpg.com/cgi-bin/catalog/pview.pl?action=view&stocknum=ea0003&h=header_t20&s=

Is listed as being written by him already.

Downlaoding now...

 

[Psion]

Edit: Nevermind

 

[hirch duckfinder]

does anyone know what kind of character group this adventure is for ?

 

[Flynn]

Dude, I didn't know. Wow! Shows how much I pay attention to some things...

Cool, then congrats on ANOTHER Epic going into production,
Flynn

 

[clementk]

Okay not seeing EPIC#4 in the eblibrary and CotI still says EPIC#2 now available... >.<

[CLARIFICATION]This is through my elibrary account which has a number of issues remaining. No sign of EPIC#4 being available for me to choose.

Casey

 

[Morte]

So how many crew does it take to run a 800 ton Lorimar Class Merchant Cruiser? Is that a central concern of the adventure, or is the planet that's mentioned the main focus?

Should I be looking at this for my party of one PC and one NPC?

 

[dancha]

Good afternoon, everyone:

I'd just like to second or third or whatever the CALL FOR POSTING EA#4 to the eLibrary!!!

I'd like to get a hold of it as soon as I can.

Hunter et al: please edit the eLibrary so we can take it as part of our subscriptions!

Thanks in advance,
Dan

 

[Burocrate]

System must be slow or "hung-up" somewhere. I read the blurb for EA0004 and purchased it as quickly as I could type. Problem is that the aforementioned product is not appearring on my personal account. Hope Hunter et all can fix this soon, I can feel the first symptoms of Deprivation: Traveller aka the other "DTs".

 

[Burocrate]

After I posted that whine above, I tried again and found it! Well done and all that, proably so many requests for the product slowed down the availability. I don't want to know why this could not be the answer, hell I don't really care. You why? Because my printer is busy putting this new EA into my-hot-little-hands. Once again, a big thankyou to the folks a QLI.

 

[hunter]

Damn sorry about that! All should be set now.

Hunter

 

[Morte]

Man, you guys really need to decide whether Mamikha is part of the imperium or not (GtD main text/maps vary, Imperial Trade Cluster says it isn't, and now EA4 says it is).

 

[hunter]

Originally posted by Morte:
Man, you guys really need to decide whether Mamikha is part of the imperium or not (GtD main text/maps vary, Imperial Trade Cluster says it isn't, and now EA4 says it is).

The print version of Gateway was corrected to reflect that Mamikha is NOT an Imperial world at the moment.

I missed that in EA4, my apologies. I am updating the EPIC now and will post the update shortly.

Hunter

 

[hunter]

Uploading the revised PDFs now. If you already have the EPIC, all that was changed was the Allegience of Mamikha from Im to Xx.

Hunter

 

[Psion]

Originally posted by hirch duckfinder:
does anyone know what kind of character group this adventure is for ?

Ship's crew, pref with merchant experience. From what I have seen so far, it looks like some interpersonal skills would help the group prosper.

Nice adventure. Shades of Leviathan* (but much more detailed) and Night of Conquest.

* - Where are my jump torps?

 

[Michael Taylor]

Quote: "So how many crew does it take to run a 800 ton Lorimar Class Merchant Cruiser? Is that a central concern of the adventure, or is the planet that's mentioned the main focus?
Should I be looking at this for my party of one PC and one NPC?"

Lorimars take 17 crew but most will be NPCs regardless of how many PCs your group has. You could do it with 1 PC and 1 NPC but you would have to occupy senior positions in the crew manifest for the adventure to work. A Lorimar NPC crew are listed in the Cast of Characters section.

This adventure would suit a starship/trading/merchant skilled group of players. A starship is not necessary for the adventure.

 

[Michael Taylor]

J-Torps? Well, I decided to avoid that nest of vipers.

Pseudo-Leviathan was the brief but having played LEviathan in the 80s (for years on end as a campaign) I felt the ship was too large so scaled it down a bit with the 800 ton Lorimar.

 

[Morte]

Originally posted by hunter:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Morte:
Man, you guys really need to decide whether Mamikha is part of the imperium or not (GtD main text/maps vary, Imperial Trade Cluster says it isn't, and now EA4 says it is).

The print version of Gateway was corrected to reflect that Mamikha is NOT an Imperial world at the moment.</font>[/QUOTE]Ah ha. Are you going to update the GtD PDF? [Or have you done it, since we can't tell if there's been a version change from the file library page?]

 

[dancha]

Hey Michael and Hunter:

This is great stuff -- as usual, of course. Thanks so much for publishing this when you did. After a couple month long dry spell, I was getting...desperate (^_^)

However, I've just found a typo ("word-o") that is most likely the result of an overeager spellchecker. That is, the word is correctly spelled; it's just the wrong word. (I offer this information with both complete sincerity and a slight poke in the ribs, as you'll soon see.)

On page 18, in the second paragraph of "Scene 1: The Merchant Cruiser (Key Scene), the word "salacious" appears. I expect that the intended word was "spacious," or perhaps "ostentatious," since the rest of the paragraph is about how wealthy and luxurious everything is.

What makes this funny, of course is, the definition for "salacious:"

1. Appealing to or stimulating sexual desire; lascivious.
2. Lustful; bawdy.

Whether or not this merits a correction is up to you guys. But I think you should know.

Thanks again, very much,
Dan