Unless you are talking about the drop capsule article, there's nothing. If you ARE referring to the drop capsule article in TD#15, there are some problems with regarding it as errata (like what's the Parachute skill, and how do you determine the number of combat drops during character generation, etc). So I really cannot use that article...
Errata - that difficult subject
- Thread starter vraymond
- Start date
No, Don, I was suggesting both skills get added to both cascades...Originally posted by DonM:
Sorry -- adding skills outside the standard set just doesn't meet the "errata" concept to me. This feels more like "addenda".
Also, you can't add it to Special Combat - the advanced Marine generation rules don't use that cascade without another fix
OK, dumb question: Where?
-Swiftbrook
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
If you click on DomM's name in the sidebar it takes you to his profile page, which has a link to his web site...
or here's the direct link:
http://winterwar.prairienet.org/dmckinne/trav.html
or here's the direct link:
http://winterwar.prairienet.org/dmckinne/trav.html
Got a question:
On pg 69 we have the following:
11 Neutrino Sensors
Neutrino sensors point to the direction of fission or fusion
NEUTRINO SENSORS
TL Minimum Magnitude Power Volume Weight Price
10* -- 0.005 0.008 0.004 1,000
11 1 Gw 0.500 1.0 0.450 60,000
12 1 Mw 0.400 0.8 0.300 75,000
13 100Kw 0.300 0.4 0.170 90,000
14 10Kw 0.200 0.2 0.095 110,000
16 1Kw 0.100 0.1 0.070 120,000
18 1Kw 0.050 0.1 0.070 120,000
20 1Kw 0.025 0.1 0.070 120,000
* Nondiscriminant direction sensor only. Simply indicates the direction to the highest neutrino source, depending on the range setting.
On pg 88, we have the following:
NEUTRINO SENSORS
1 Gw +1
1 Mw +2
100 Kw +4
10 Kw +6
1 Kw +8
1 Kw +10
Any idea what Tech Level do we get the +10?
On pg 69 we have the following:
11 Neutrino Sensors
Neutrino sensors point to the direction of fission or fusion
NEUTRINO SENSORS
TL Minimum Magnitude Power Volume Weight Price
10* -- 0.005 0.008 0.004 1,000
11 1 Gw 0.500 1.0 0.450 60,000
12 1 Mw 0.400 0.8 0.300 75,000
13 100Kw 0.300 0.4 0.170 90,000
14 10Kw 0.200 0.2 0.095 110,000
16 1Kw 0.100 0.1 0.070 120,000
18 1Kw 0.050 0.1 0.070 120,000
20 1Kw 0.025 0.1 0.070 120,000
* Nondiscriminant direction sensor only. Simply indicates the direction to the highest neutrino source, depending on the range setting.
On pg 88, we have the following:
NEUTRINO SENSORS
1 Gw +1
1 Mw +2
100 Kw +4
10 Kw +6
1 Kw +8
1 Kw +10
Any idea what Tech Level do we get the +10?
Thanks. I am retypsetting, correcting errors with your errata listing, adding additional material (One Small Step from Hard Times, the early tech supplement from Challenge 61, etc.) to my copy of the Referee's manual & the amount of errors, typos, etc is just amazing. I am nearly done with the text, but the charts may take a while.
Of course, my typing isn't helping.
Of course, my typing isn't helping.
I couldn't do this project without your errata. The only thing I would add to it is to tell us on the front page what was updated from the last version.
Last night, while watching ND get blown out of the Sugar Bowl, I saw at least one error on the Tech tables in the Refeere's Companion. Somebody missed hitting the tab key. As soon as I finish reviewing those, I'll send you a corrected version.
Additional articles that I would recommend:
Somewhere I have an article that explains the booster power plant concept & how to integrate it into the design sequence. I'll get you be particulars once I find it.
Revised Stellar Generation System version 2.3 by Constantine Thomas (26/6/2004) - got it off the web.
Ships of the Black War - Charles Gannon, Challenge 60. (Neat ships that actually make sense in a tactical and strategic sense and that characters might acutally run into.)
A MegaTraveller Starship Design Example - Joe D. Fugate - Traveller's Digest 13. This is far and away the best walk-thru the design sequence I have seen.
It only has 1 typo that I have found so far. Of course, it is also a fairly critical one, as is typical for the folks that did MT. (The design is adjusted from Maneuver 6 to 2 in the charts, but lists Manuever 1 in the text.)
There is also the issue of the resulting design not meeting any requirements of a cruiser. It isn't fast in a tactical or strategic sense, and has no extended endurance, which are critical issues for a cruiser. Of course this is a design philosophy issue, but as a Military person, it drives me crazy to see stuff like this. And I am not even in the navy.
I love the DGP products to death, but really, they had NO business writing the core rules. You can't build design sequences that say "You MUST first..." and then whine when people do just that.
Final Notes and questions:
One of the nice things about retypesetting all of this is that I can put things where they belong.
All of those damned maps are getting moved into the Imperial Encyclopedia and the Rebellion Sourcebook.
I have a Demolition table on page 103 & a weapon stat format table on page 89. Where would you recommend these actually go? They make no sense where they are at. I don't know if they just slapped them in to fill space or what.
Harry Bryan
Last night, while watching ND get blown out of the Sugar Bowl, I saw at least one error on the Tech tables in the Refeere's Companion. Somebody missed hitting the tab key. As soon as I finish reviewing those, I'll send you a corrected version.
Additional articles that I would recommend:
Somewhere I have an article that explains the booster power plant concept & how to integrate it into the design sequence. I'll get you be particulars once I find it.
Revised Stellar Generation System version 2.3 by Constantine Thomas (26/6/2004) - got it off the web.
Ships of the Black War - Charles Gannon, Challenge 60. (Neat ships that actually make sense in a tactical and strategic sense and that characters might acutally run into.)
A MegaTraveller Starship Design Example - Joe D. Fugate - Traveller's Digest 13. This is far and away the best walk-thru the design sequence I have seen.
It only has 1 typo that I have found so far. Of course, it is also a fairly critical one, as is typical for the folks that did MT. (The design is adjusted from Maneuver 6 to 2 in the charts, but lists Manuever 1 in the text.)
There is also the issue of the resulting design not meeting any requirements of a cruiser. It isn't fast in a tactical or strategic sense, and has no extended endurance, which are critical issues for a cruiser. Of course this is a design philosophy issue, but as a Military person, it drives me crazy to see stuff like this. And I am not even in the navy.
I love the DGP products to death, but really, they had NO business writing the core rules. You can't build design sequences that say "You MUST first..." and then whine when people do just that.
Final Notes and questions:
One of the nice things about retypesetting all of this is that I can put things where they belong.
All of those damned maps are getting moved into the Imperial Encyclopedia and the Rebellion Sourcebook.
I have a Demolition table on page 103 & a weapon stat format table on page 89. Where would you recommend these actually go? They make no sense where they are at. I don't know if they just slapped them in to fill space or what.
Harry Bryan
Reg Redblade
SOC-8
I couldn't agree with this more. Over the last twenty years or so I have picked up pretty much everything that DGP put out - I love the TD and MTJ - they are fantastic periodicals - and the Alien modules are genuinely interesting in their own right - leaving aside their enormous usefulness as Trav Aids
BUT : Megatraveller was a disaster from an errata point of view *. I was 12 when it came out and I don't know how many times I tried to wade through the ship design sequence ( I wasn't aware of the Ship Design errata and walk through until quite recently ).
I suppose half of running a game design company and guiding a product line is knowing the right guys for the right job .
DGP - Campaign development, versimilitude, scenarios, general storylining - YES !
System Streamlining and Re-organisation - NO !*
But I love all their products regardless.
RR.
* Despite the warts MT is in my opinion still the best rules system ( Task system is excellent ) and I have always loved the Shattered Imperium setting.
** ironically, JF states in one of the TDs/MTJs that he is known around the office as " Mr System " - and he does show a lot of ability with innovation in the Task and combat System - but as far as putting MT together - " Oh God Joe, where did it go so wrong ..."
Well, I was a little harsh in my assessment. GDW was responsible for the hash-up of the rule book.
It was their product & they didn't review anything. They were aggressively uninterested in MT, and it showed.
All one has to do is look at the product & the production schedule. Nearly everything was written by DGP.
To get back on topic:
All GDW had to do was have one person sit down with a ruler and 1/2 of errata would have been caught. It was simply a lack of attention to detail. Things like Fighting Ships Of The Shattered Imperium should have never gone out the door. (I don't think there is a single valid design in the book.)
It was their product & they didn't review anything. They were aggressively uninterested in MT, and it showed.
All one has to do is look at the product & the production schedule. Nearly everything was written by DGP.
To get back on topic:
All GDW had to do was have one person sit down with a ruler and 1/2 of errata would have been caught. It was simply a lack of attention to detail. Things like Fighting Ships Of The Shattered Imperium should have never gone out the door. (I don't think there is a single valid design in the book.)
Personally, and based upon the comments of the DGP guys in prior posts, DGP really was a good choice to do the core rules.
The problem is that GDW should have been totally hands off... instead, the transfer from Mac to the GDW Typesetter resulted in piss-poor quality control.
After all, the slightly lower visual quality within DGP products was almost error free...
The problem is that GDW should have been totally hands off... instead, the transfer from Mac to the GDW Typesetter resulted in piss-poor quality control.
After all, the slightly lower visual quality within DGP products was almost error free...
Yet more errata
pg 70 EMS Active Array & EMS Passive Array
The Tech Level Active Array goes:
10 11 12 14 16 18 20
The Tech Level Passive Array goes:
10 11 12 13 14 16 18 20
Yet there is nothing under the TL 20 Row.
Does the 13 go away or the 20? It makes more since to me that the 13 heading go away to match the Active Array chart.
pg 70 EMS Active Array & EMS Passive Array
The Tech Level Active Array goes:
10 11 12 14 16 18 20
The Tech Level Passive Array goes:
10 11 12 13 14 16 18 20
Yet there is nothing under the TL 20 Row.
Does the 13 go away or the 20? It makes more since to me that the 13 heading go away to match the Active Array chart.
Similar threads
MT Only:
My MT Errata Odyssey
