Errata for books 1-3 Reprints
- Thread starter Jeffr0
- Start date
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
Not that I know of.
It might be a good idea to identify all the problems, find the answers, and post it here somewhere.
It might be a good idea to identify all the problems, find the answers, and post it here somewhere.
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
Not that I know of.
It might be a good idea to identify all the problems, find the answers, and post it here somewhere.
It might be a good idea to identify all the problems, find the answers, and post it here somewhere.
far-trader
SOC-14 10K
Seconded.
I was actually wondering about kicking out the idea a couple nights ago or just doing it. So I'm in for whatever I can add to it.
I think the way to do it would be just via posts here. Questions (note edition and pub. date) and fixes (identified as official with source or house rule). Then when it's done it could be compiled and loaded up to the fLibrary. And then onto the rest of the LBB's
I was actually wondering about kicking out the idea a couple nights ago or just doing it. So I'm in for whatever I can add to it.
I think the way to do it would be just via posts here. Questions (note edition and pub. date) and fixes (identified as official with source or house rule). Then when it's done it could be compiled and loaded up to the fLibrary. And then onto the rest of the LBB's
far-trader
SOC-14 10K
Seconded.
I was actually wondering about kicking out the idea a couple nights ago or just doing it. So I'm in for whatever I can add to it.
I think the way to do it would be just via posts here. Questions (note edition and pub. date) and fixes (identified as official with source or house rule). Then when it's done it could be compiled and loaded up to the fLibrary. And then onto the rest of the LBB's
I was actually wondering about kicking out the idea a couple nights ago or just doing it. So I'm in for whatever I can add to it.
I think the way to do it would be just via posts here. Questions (note edition and pub. date) and fixes (identified as official with source or house rule). Then when it's done it could be compiled and loaded up to the fLibrary. And then onto the rest of the LBB's
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
Here are a few of the things that change from edition to edition for LBB1.
Noble title by social standing characteristic rating.
Number of skills per term for scouts.
Death in character generation.
Number of mustering out benefits due to rank.
Acquired skills tables changes.
Skill description changes.
Example of how to apply combat damage.
Changes to weapon matrices, damage especially.
That's off the top of my head, there are probably others.
Once we can list all the changes we can then look at what needs errata.
Noble title by social standing characteristic rating.
Number of skills per term for scouts.
Death in character generation.
Number of mustering out benefits due to rank.
Acquired skills tables changes.
Skill description changes.
Example of how to apply combat damage.
Changes to weapon matrices, damage especially.
That's off the top of my head, there are probably others.
Once we can list all the changes we can then look at what needs errata.
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
Here are a few of the things that change from edition to edition for LBB1.
Noble title by social standing characteristic rating.
Number of skills per term for scouts.
Death in character generation.
Number of mustering out benefits due to rank.
Acquired skills tables changes.
Skill description changes.
Example of how to apply combat damage.
Changes to weapon matrices, damage especially.
That's off the top of my head, there are probably others.
Once we can list all the changes we can then look at what needs errata.
Noble title by social standing characteristic rating.
Number of skills per term for scouts.
Death in character generation.
Number of mustering out benefits due to rank.
Acquired skills tables changes.
Skill description changes.
Example of how to apply combat damage.
Changes to weapon matrices, damage especially.
That's off the top of my head, there are probably others.
Once we can list all the changes we can then look at what needs errata.
I was reading Book 2 last night and could not find anything the explained Sandcasters.
Missiles are similarly fuzzy.
Footnotes detailing the differences between Snapshot, Mayday, and Books 1-3 would be good.
Also, a list of rules supplements that appeared in JTAS would be good. (One detailed more info on missiles, of course.)
Missiles are similarly fuzzy.
Footnotes detailing the differences between Snapshot, Mayday, and Books 1-3 would be good.
Also, a list of rules supplements that appeared in JTAS would be good. (One detailed more info on missiles, of course.)
I was reading Book 2 last night and could not find anything the explained Sandcasters.
Missiles are similarly fuzzy.
Footnotes detailing the differences between Snapshot, Mayday, and Books 1-3 would be good.
Also, a list of rules supplements that appeared in JTAS would be good. (One detailed more info on missiles, of course.)
Missiles are similarly fuzzy.
Footnotes detailing the differences between Snapshot, Mayday, and Books 1-3 would be good.
Also, a list of rules supplements that appeared in JTAS would be good. (One detailed more info on missiles, of course.)
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
Things that change between editions of LBB2.
Jump fuel usage.
Jump drives require a power plant.
Computer must equal jump number.
Drive potential table.
Rules for pulse lasers.
Different types of missiles (including the dreaded jump torpedo
).
Different standard ships, small craft and vehicles.
Computer program changes.
And I agree with Jeff0, you have to borrow from Mayday to make sandcasters and missiles work.
Jump fuel usage.
Jump drives require a power plant.
Computer must equal jump number.
Drive potential table.
Rules for pulse lasers.
Different types of missiles (including the dreaded jump torpedo
Different standard ships, small craft and vehicles.
Computer program changes.
And I agree with Jeff0, you have to borrow from Mayday to make sandcasters and missiles work.
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
Things that change between editions of LBB2.
Jump fuel usage.
Jump drives require a power plant.
Computer must equal jump number.
Drive potential table.
Rules for pulse lasers.
Different types of missiles (including the dreaded jump torpedo
).
Different standard ships, small craft and vehicles.
Computer program changes.
And I agree with Jeff0, you have to borrow from Mayday to make sandcasters and missiles work.
Jump fuel usage.
Jump drives require a power plant.
Computer must equal jump number.
Drive potential table.
Rules for pulse lasers.
Different types of missiles (including the dreaded jump torpedo
Different standard ships, small craft and vehicles.
Computer program changes.
And I agree with Jeff0, you have to borrow from Mayday to make sandcasters and missiles work.
far-trader
SOC-14 10K
Alrighty, deciding to just do what occurs to me or pops up here's my first little note:
Starship Encounters (table)
Both books handy (book 2 2nd ed/reprint pg 35 & The Traveller Book pg 75) have a couple problems.
First the +2 for a Naval base in system should only be applied to Class A and B starports per the generation rules of no Naval bases for Class C, D, E, or X systems (which some UWP data sets also have wrong).
This means the entries for a roll of 14 or 15 on the Class C column are invalid as well as the roll of 14 on the Class D column.
Second the rationalization of the P suffix for a Pirate encounter weren't thought out too well. "Oh, so we see a Type T (or C) approaching. Hmm, the system is a Class E starport so they must be a Pirate." Sure it's metagaming at it's worst but the table is just bad that way. The same problem happens with the Type T in a Class D system.
For what it's worth this is the way I recall working out the Book 2 version to fix and streamline the table:
Starship Encounters (table)
Both books handy (book 2 2nd ed/reprint pg 35 & The Traveller Book pg 75) have a couple problems.
First the +2 for a Naval base in system should only be applied to Class A and B starports per the generation rules of no Naval bases for Class C, D, E, or X systems (which some UWP data sets also have wrong).
This means the entries for a roll of 14 or 15 on the Class C column are invalid as well as the roll of 14 on the Class D column.
Second the rationalization of the P suffix for a Pirate encounter weren't thought out too well. "Oh, so we see a Type T (or C) approaching. Hmm, the system is a Class E starport so they must be a Pirate." Sure it's metagaming at it's worst but the table is just bad that way. The same problem happens with the Type T in a Class D system.
For what it's worth this is the way I recall working out the Book 2 version to fix and streamline the table:
Code:
S t a r p o r t C l a s s S h i p T y p e N o t e s
2d6 A B C D E X * = roll 1d6 below
2 - - - - - - DMs = -1 if S Base, +2 if N Base
3 * * - - - - 1 = 20t Launch
4 * * - - - - 2 = 30t Boat
5 * * * * - - 3 = 40t Pinnace
6 S Y * * - - 4 = 95t Shuttle
7 A S (A) (*) - - 5 = 1d3 50t Cutters
8 Y A R A (*) - 6 = 2d3 10t Fighters
9 R M (T) (C) (A) (T) A = 200t Free Trader
A M S S (S) (T) (A) C = 800t Mercenary Cruiser
B T R (C) (T) (S) (C) M = 600t Subsidized Liner
C S C M S (C) (S) R = 400t Subsidized Merchant
D C A (S) (A) - - S = 100t Scout/Courier
E T S - - - - T = 400t Patrol Cruiser
F S T - - - - Y = 200t Yacht
DMs = +1 if S Base, +2 if N Base;(bracketed) indicates may be pirate
Last edited:
Enoff
SOC-13
No doubt the little black books have fired the imagination of a lot of people...
...When I first bought the books in high school back in the late seventies. I thought they were fantastically great. Now when I reread the rules over twenty years later I realize how incomplete and vague they are.
I almost only think of them as source books, I don't think the game is really playable without a lot of tweaking.
Resolving combat is very vague, I have to admit I think the combat sequence in TSR's Star Frontiers is much better thought out and presented. Seems to me like the SF system was better tested in a group of players.
...When I first bought the books in high school back in the late seventies. I thought they were fantastically great. Now when I reread the rules over twenty years later I realize how incomplete and vague they are.
I almost only think of them as source books, I don't think the game is really playable without a lot of tweaking.
Resolving combat is very vague, I have to admit I think the combat sequence in TSR's Star Frontiers is much better thought out and presented. Seems to me like the SF system was better tested in a group of players.
Enoff
SOC-13
No doubt the little black books have fired the imagination of a lot of people...
...When I first bought the books in high school back in the late seventies. I thought they were fantastically great. Now when I reread the rules over twenty years later I realize how incomplete and vague they are.
I almost only think of them as source books, I don't think the game is really playable without a lot of tweaking.
Resolving combat is very vague, I have to admit I think the combat sequence in TSR's Star Frontiers is much better thought out and presented. Seems to me like the SF system was better tested in a group of players.
...When I first bought the books in high school back in the late seventies. I thought they were fantastically great. Now when I reread the rules over twenty years later I realize how incomplete and vague they are.
I almost only think of them as source books, I don't think the game is really playable without a lot of tweaking.
Resolving combat is very vague, I have to admit I think the combat sequence in TSR's Star Frontiers is much better thought out and presented. Seems to me like the SF system was better tested in a group of players.
Enoff,
I agree that blind testing is a good thing.
Things that have confused me in Mayday-Snapshot-BooksI-III:
Computers-- When learning Mayday, I didn't realize that the programs could be changed during each phase of combat. This drastically messed up my understanding of what ships could and couldn't do. I also didn't grasp that programs could be changed between turns. Anything that makes this crystal clear would be a good thing. (I actually like the potential of such a system, as a contrast to SFB's Energy Allocation and BattleTech's Heat Scale.) On my original reading of Mayday, I had an image of Scouts being extremely ineffective in combat-- and also them having to dock with other ships to download programs!! I'm rereading Book II to make sure I grok it....
Also, the "standard missiles." If they always go towards the present position counter, then they are a cinch to evade as they zig zag all around. Maybe they'd never hit. The esteemed Robert Prior suggested having the missile move towards the future position counter once the missile's future position counter reaches the target's present position counter. (Simple!
)
Some sort of brief explanation of why people use swords in an era of laser beams would be good. The Snapshot silouettes are groovey, though.
Also... is it really possible to play at the reccomended Book II scale? Seems like it would take a lot of space!
I agree that blind testing is a good thing.
Things that have confused me in Mayday-Snapshot-BooksI-III:
Computers-- When learning Mayday, I didn't realize that the programs could be changed during each phase of combat. This drastically messed up my understanding of what ships could and couldn't do. I also didn't grasp that programs could be changed between turns. Anything that makes this crystal clear would be a good thing. (I actually like the potential of such a system, as a contrast to SFB's Energy Allocation and BattleTech's Heat Scale.) On my original reading of Mayday, I had an image of Scouts being extremely ineffective in combat-- and also them having to dock with other ships to download programs!! I'm rereading Book II to make sure I grok it....
Also, the "standard missiles." If they always go towards the present position counter, then they are a cinch to evade as they zig zag all around. Maybe they'd never hit. The esteemed Robert Prior suggested having the missile move towards the future position counter once the missile's future position counter reaches the target's present position counter. (Simple!
Some sort of brief explanation of why people use swords in an era of laser beams would be good. The Snapshot silouettes are groovey, though.
Also... is it really possible to play at the reccomended Book II scale? Seems like it would take a lot of space!
Enoff,
I agree that blind testing is a good thing.
Things that have confused me in Mayday-Snapshot-BooksI-III:
Computers-- When learning Mayday, I didn't realize that the programs could be changed during each phase of combat. This drastically messed up my understanding of what ships could and couldn't do. I also didn't grasp that programs could be changed between turns. Anything that makes this crystal clear would be a good thing. (I actually like the potential of such a system, as a contrast to SFB's Energy Allocation and BattleTech's Heat Scale.) On my original reading of Mayday, I had an image of Scouts being extremely ineffective in combat-- and also them having to dock with other ships to download programs!! I'm rereading Book II to make sure I grok it....
Also, the "standard missiles." If they always go towards the present position counter, then they are a cinch to evade as they zig zag all around. Maybe they'd never hit. The esteemed Robert Prior suggested having the missile move towards the future position counter once the missile's future position counter reaches the target's present position counter. (Simple!
)
Some sort of brief explanation of why people use swords in an era of laser beams would be good. The Snapshot silouettes are groovey, though.
Also... is it really possible to play at the reccomended Book II scale? Seems like it would take a lot of space!
I agree that blind testing is a good thing.
Things that have confused me in Mayday-Snapshot-BooksI-III:
Computers-- When learning Mayday, I didn't realize that the programs could be changed during each phase of combat. This drastically messed up my understanding of what ships could and couldn't do. I also didn't grasp that programs could be changed between turns. Anything that makes this crystal clear would be a good thing. (I actually like the potential of such a system, as a contrast to SFB's Energy Allocation and BattleTech's Heat Scale.) On my original reading of Mayday, I had an image of Scouts being extremely ineffective in combat-- and also them having to dock with other ships to download programs!! I'm rereading Book II to make sure I grok it....
Also, the "standard missiles." If they always go towards the present position counter, then they are a cinch to evade as they zig zag all around. Maybe they'd never hit. The esteemed Robert Prior suggested having the missile move towards the future position counter once the missile's future position counter reaches the target's present position counter. (Simple!
Some sort of brief explanation of why people use swords in an era of laser beams would be good. The Snapshot silouettes are groovey, though.
Also... is it really possible to play at the reccomended Book II scale? Seems like it would take a lot of space!
You could also try moving the future position of the missile to coincide with the target's future position from the start. No need to wait.
Well, lower tech levels and higher law levels sort of require them, but if you mean the Marines/cutlass thing then that would probably be written off as a fumble in the original rules. One of the first issues of JTAS made an attempt to justify it but subsequent editions toned blade combat skill down to a more reasonable level.
You could also try moving the future position of the missile to coincide with the target's future position from the start. No need to wait.
Well, lower tech levels and higher law levels sort of require them, but if you mean the Marines/cutlass thing then that would probably be written off as a fumble in the original rules. One of the first issues of JTAS made an attempt to justify it but subsequent editions toned blade combat skill down to a more reasonable level.
Piper,
That would be the way the intelligent guidance option works. The standard missiles have to be dumber than that.
(Special Supplement 3 seems to merge the missile rules from Mayday into Book II. What you suggest may be the way it was intended when there was nothing but Book II.)
That would be the way the intelligent guidance option works. The standard missiles have to be dumber than that.
(Special Supplement 3 seems to merge the missile rules from Mayday into Book II. What you suggest may be the way it was intended when there was nothing but Book II.)
Similar threads
