Errata - that difficult subject
- Thread starter vraymond
- Start date
I have been asked as to the specific lineage of the Stellar Generation errata I've posted (and now deleted) above...
Looking at the existing MT rules, on RM p. 26, Step 5, #6 above simply changes the existing item #6 to add A0 and A5 to that rule. The rest come from sources such as Geo Galinas' "Collapsing Worlds" article in Challenge #77, notes from Leroy Guatney regarding the data ultimately used for Regency Sourcebook, and information from Jon Ziegler regarding the stellar changes implemented for work on Rim of Fire.
HOWEVER, now that I'm looking through my sources again, I've found additional notes from Harold Hale and Cynthia Higgenbotham used for TNE and T4 material...
Since ultimately any stellar generation changes affect the Traveller setting as a whole, it makes sense to have a set of changes which can be reduced to errata to MT generation for referees.
But I can't seem to find any "golden" set. It would appear that the author of each book knowing about the problem came up with their own fixes, and authors that didn't know about the problem either didn't fix it, or an editor did a partial job for them.
Looking at the existing MT rules, on RM p. 26, Step 5, #6 above simply changes the existing item #6 to add A0 and A5 to that rule. The rest come from sources such as Geo Galinas' "Collapsing Worlds" article in Challenge #77, notes from Leroy Guatney regarding the data ultimately used for Regency Sourcebook, and information from Jon Ziegler regarding the stellar changes implemented for work on Rim of Fire.
HOWEVER, now that I'm looking through my sources again, I've found additional notes from Harold Hale and Cynthia Higgenbotham used for TNE and T4 material...
Since ultimately any stellar generation changes affect the Traveller setting as a whole, it makes sense to have a set of changes which can be reduced to errata to MT generation for referees.
But I can't seem to find any "golden" set. It would appear that the author of each book knowing about the problem came up with their own fixes, and authors that didn't know about the problem either didn't fix it, or an editor did a partial job for them.
Border Reiver
SOC-14 1K
Additional Errata from the Stellar Generation review...
Page 27, Step 15, Orbit Zones for Star Size Ib (correction): Orbit 11 for K5 and M0 star types should be “H”.
Page 27, right column, Orbit Zones for Star Size III, IV, and V (correction): Remove the entries from all three tables for star types B0 and B5.
Mass Drivers: I um... never looked at it. But I will
Page 27, Step 15, Orbit Zones for Star Size Ib (correction): Orbit 11 for K5 and M0 star types should be “H”.
Page 27, right column, Orbit Zones for Star Size III, IV, and V (correction): Remove the entries from all three tables for star types B0 and B5.
Mass Drivers: I um... never looked at it. But I will
Arrgh... I've found another source for RSB stellar changes. I'm going to just scream. How many people had their hands in the stellar data, and did they ALL have to use different methods?
Let me see if I can come up with a better method of straighening this out. Or I could just flip a coin.
Let me see if I can come up with a better method of straighening this out. Or I could just flip a coin.
After sifting through all the stuff I've found, I've got two main sources, and I'm disregarding the others... These would be Geo's changes, and Harold Hale's changes...
Why disregard the others? Leroy's changes were not used by the rest of the TNE group, while Harold's were passed around to anyone that wanted them (including at least two postings to the TML). The concensus is that Harold Hale's method was used by most TNE authors, while Geo's method was actually published (in the LAST issue of Challenge).
When you finally put these two side by side, they match up VERY well, so I'm putting them together here...
So, here goes:
1. Change all class "D" stars which are the primary star for a system to class "V" stars.
2. Change all class "VI" stars to class "V" stars. Leroy's notes keep some size VIs, but this is WAY simpler.
3. Check the class "IV" stars. Change the class of any star which is "K5 IV" through "K9 IV" and all "M IV" stars to class "V" stars. These spectral ranges do not exist for the "IV" class of stars. (This is already in MT, but not in Bk 6.)
4. Eliminate the "B II", "B III" and "B IV" stars, as these are VERY RARE (like the existing note on "O" and "A" stars). There are some TML notes on removing "A", "F" and "G" size II & III stars for the same reason. (Since B isn't an option for either Step 4 or 6, we can ignore this.)
4. All M4V, M5V, M6V, M7V, M8V, and M9V stars that have a habitable planet (one with atmosphere type 4-9 or D-F), should be converted using the table below. Systems containing a M3 V star should be examined on an individual basis for conversion (a world circling such a star would be a *very* chilly place indeed...if you intend the world to be like Star Wars' iceplanet Hoth or some cold, barren desert it should work "as is", but if you had something a bit "balmier" in mind, change the star).
DIE STELLAR
ROLL CLASS
1 K
2 K
3 K
4 G
5 G
6 F
(I dislike the table -- I want a rule here, not a random choice. Random choice doesn't seem like errata.)
For COMPANIONS:
1) If two or more companions are "D", change them all to "V".
2) Replace all remaining "D" companions with "V", except those with a large primary (size II, III, or IV).
Cynthia Higgenbotham proposed a complicated 3-table mechanism for determining companions, but these two steps seem much simpler to me.
So, this brings us back to the proposed errata for RM 26:
Step 4: Change star sizes VI and D to V.
Step 6: Change star size VI to V.
Step 5:
5. Star types K5 to M9 are not available with star size IV; change star size to V.
6. Star types A, F and G are extremely rare with star sizes II and III; change star size to V.
7. Star types M4V through M9V cannot have habitable worlds; subtract 6 from the decimal class, so that such worlds become M0V through M3V. (Or do people like the table above?)
8. If two or more stars in the same system are size "D", change them all to size "V".
9. Unless the primary star is size II, III, or IV, change remaining companion size "D" stars to size "V".
Except for #7 on step 5, I like this. Thoughts?
Why disregard the others? Leroy's changes were not used by the rest of the TNE group, while Harold's were passed around to anyone that wanted them (including at least two postings to the TML). The concensus is that Harold Hale's method was used by most TNE authors, while Geo's method was actually published (in the LAST issue of Challenge).
When you finally put these two side by side, they match up VERY well, so I'm putting them together here...
So, here goes:
1. Change all class "D" stars which are the primary star for a system to class "V" stars.
2. Change all class "VI" stars to class "V" stars. Leroy's notes keep some size VIs, but this is WAY simpler.
3. Check the class "IV" stars. Change the class of any star which is "K5 IV" through "K9 IV" and all "M IV" stars to class "V" stars. These spectral ranges do not exist for the "IV" class of stars. (This is already in MT, but not in Bk 6.)
4. Eliminate the "B II", "B III" and "B IV" stars, as these are VERY RARE (like the existing note on "O" and "A" stars). There are some TML notes on removing "A", "F" and "G" size II & III stars for the same reason. (Since B isn't an option for either Step 4 or 6, we can ignore this.)
4. All M4V, M5V, M6V, M7V, M8V, and M9V stars that have a habitable planet (one with atmosphere type 4-9 or D-F), should be converted using the table below. Systems containing a M3 V star should be examined on an individual basis for conversion (a world circling such a star would be a *very* chilly place indeed...if you intend the world to be like Star Wars' iceplanet Hoth or some cold, barren desert it should work "as is", but if you had something a bit "balmier" in mind, change the star).
DIE STELLAR
ROLL CLASS
1 K
2 K
3 K
4 G
5 G
6 F
(I dislike the table -- I want a rule here, not a random choice. Random choice doesn't seem like errata.)
For COMPANIONS:
1) If two or more companions are "D", change them all to "V".
2) Replace all remaining "D" companions with "V", except those with a large primary (size II, III, or IV).
Cynthia Higgenbotham proposed a complicated 3-table mechanism for determining companions, but these two steps seem much simpler to me.
So, this brings us back to the proposed errata for RM 26:
Step 4: Change star sizes VI and D to V.
Step 6: Change star size VI to V.
Step 5:
5. Star types K5 to M9 are not available with star size IV; change star size to V.
6. Star types A, F and G are extremely rare with star sizes II and III; change star size to V.
7. Star types M4V through M9V cannot have habitable worlds; subtract 6 from the decimal class, so that such worlds become M0V through M3V. (Or do people like the table above?)
8. If two or more stars in the same system are size "D", change them all to size "V".
9. Unless the primary star is size II, III, or IV, change remaining companion size "D" stars to size "V".
Except for #7 on step 5, I like this. Thoughts?
M
Malenfant
Guest
As I pointed out to you via PM, the problem is that these aren't really "errata", they're peoples' house rules to try to get the system to make sense.
Check p23 of book 6, you'll see under "primary star size" that it says that if the star is K5-M9 IV or B0 to F4 VI then it should be changed to V. This was not done in most of the sunbane stellar data, which means we've got lots of M IVs and a few A VIs there. Everything else you mention is somebody's house rules though.
Check p23 of book 6, you'll see under "primary star size" that it says that if the star is K5-M9 IV or B0 to F4 VI then it should be changed to V. This was not done in most of the sunbane stellar data, which means we've got lots of M IVs and a few A VIs there. Everything else you mention is somebody's house rules though.
The problem with calling them house rules is that those house rules were used to create GDW product. That's a bit more than a house rule; and if we know something is broken (AND WE DO), and if GDW fixed it (and they DID), then we need to incorporate that fix.
I do find it interesting, as you point out, that items #5 and #6 on the list IN the Referee's Manual were known to GDW, and put in MT, and still the data ignores it.
That tells me that all those files must have been done with a pure Book 6 generator.
I could mark the Stellar Generation items (RM 26, Steps 4, 5 and 6) as Addenda, to note it as messy; however, the fact that it was used for TNE and T4 cleanup attempts raises it above the Addenda we've come up with.
And as Harry goes through the RM carefully, and I walk through the PM, I'm sure we'll find more of that kind of Addenda.
Concensus? Malenfant and I have exchanged notes and messages here, any other comments? Errata or Addenda for the Stellar Generation fixes?
I do find it interesting, as you point out, that items #5 and #6 on the list IN the Referee's Manual were known to GDW, and put in MT, and still the data ignores it.
That tells me that all those files must have been done with a pure Book 6 generator.
I could mark the Stellar Generation items (RM 26, Steps 4, 5 and 6) as Addenda, to note it as messy; however, the fact that it was used for TNE and T4 cleanup attempts raises it above the Addenda we've come up with.
And as Harry goes through the RM carefully, and I walk through the PM, I'm sure we'll find more of that kind of Addenda.
Concensus? Malenfant and I have exchanged notes and messages here, any other comments? Errata or Addenda for the Stellar Generation fixes?
M
Malenfant
Guest
Depends how you define "errata" I guess. I think it's usually defined as fixing contradictory errors or misprints in the rules. So if on page XX it says "a shotgun does 2d6 damage" and on page YY it says it does 3d6 damage, the errata would fix that.
For stars, errata would be fixing the sunbane data to conform to book 6 rules, or fixing the contradiction I found the other day regarding placing gas giants in book 6 (one page says they can only go in the hab or outer zone, another says they can go in the inner zone).
One problem is that there's so many versions of Traveller. It's not really valid to label something printed in Challenge (IIRC a MT product?) as errata for Classic Traveller, and I'd be wary about calling material printed in magazines canonical unless it's specifically stated as such. Especially if they've not been formally incorporated into subsequent rulebooks (and none of the extra rules you quote have).
For stars, errata would be fixing the sunbane data to conform to book 6 rules, or fixing the contradiction I found the other day regarding placing gas giants in book 6 (one page says they can only go in the hab or outer zone, another says they can go in the inner zone).
One problem is that there's so many versions of Traveller. It's not really valid to label something printed in Challenge (IIRC a MT product?) as errata for Classic Traveller, and I'd be wary about calling material printed in magazines canonical unless it's specifically stated as such. Especially if they've not been formally incorporated into subsequent rulebooks (and none of the extra rules you quote have).
Then Addenda it is for the Stellar Generation notes...
Page 26, Step 4, Primary Star Type and Size (addenda, correction): Change all occurrences of star sizes VI and D to V.
Page 26, Step 5, Decimal Classification (addenda, correction and addition): Remove the existing item 6 in Step 5, then add additional items:
6. Star types A, F and G are extremely rare with star sizes II and III; change star size to V.
7. Star types M4V through M9V cannot have habitable worlds; subtract 6 from the decimal classification.
8. If two or more stars in the same system are size "D", change them all to size "V".
9. Unless the primary star is size II, III, or IV, change remaining companion size "D" stars to size "V".
Page 26, Step 6, Companion Star Type and Size (addenda, correction): Change all occurrences of star size VI to V.
Other changes...
Looks like we're close to a concensus on the Mass Driver question.
I've got a set of errata cribbed from various sources that needs to be cleaned up; I'll post it here for review and comment.
After that...
We have an interesting pile of "known problems" to produce Addenda for.
Page 26, Step 4, Primary Star Type and Size (addenda, correction): Change all occurrences of star sizes VI and D to V.
Page 26, Step 5, Decimal Classification (addenda, correction and addition): Remove the existing item 6 in Step 5, then add additional items:
6. Star types A, F and G are extremely rare with star sizes II and III; change star size to V.
7. Star types M4V through M9V cannot have habitable worlds; subtract 6 from the decimal classification.
8. If two or more stars in the same system are size "D", change them all to size "V".
9. Unless the primary star is size II, III, or IV, change remaining companion size "D" stars to size "V".
Page 26, Step 6, Companion Star Type and Size (addenda, correction): Change all occurrences of star size VI to V.
Other changes...
Looks like we're close to a concensus on the Mass Driver question.
I've got a set of errata cribbed from various sources that needs to be cleaned up; I'll post it here for review and comment.
After that...
We have an interesting pile of "known problems" to produce Addenda for.
Version 2.08 is up!
There are some minor additions throughout the errata, from a collection of notes that gathered by someone at DGP (mostly from letters from Mark Galinas of TTT fame, from what I could tell). I'm considering these real errata, because they are (like the DM for E9 being +3 instead of +2).
Interestingly enough, one of the items in the list was a fix to the Special Combat issue for Marines and Army advanced generation, and another was about the Gun Combat cascade including Combat Rifleman in place of Rifleman for advanced generation.
Since this version has the the stellar addenda, and the robot addenda, I'd like to make sure I haven't offended the MT users out there... I could still break that out. But it strikes me that we're doing what should have been done, so I'd like to argue in favor of keeping the addenda in the main document.
I've also experimented with replacing the underlined errata in tables with highlighting, and I'd like some thoughts as to if that is effective.
There are some minor additions throughout the errata, from a collection of notes that gathered by someone at DGP (mostly from letters from Mark Galinas of TTT fame, from what I could tell). I'm considering these real errata, because they are (like the DM for E9 being +3 instead of +2).
Interestingly enough, one of the items in the list was a fix to the Special Combat issue for Marines and Army advanced generation, and another was about the Gun Combat cascade including Combat Rifleman in place of Rifleman for advanced generation.
Since this version has the the stellar addenda, and the robot addenda, I'd like to make sure I haven't offended the MT users out there... I could still break that out. But it strikes me that we're doing what should have been done, so I'd like to argue in favor of keeping the addenda in the main document.
I've also experimented with replacing the underlined errata in tables with highlighting, and I'd like some thoughts as to if that is effective.
scout_harris
SOC-9
This is a fantastic set of addenda. What I would love to see is a MTv2.0 come out with these addenda incorporated.
Don, nice work, but more comments:
On pg 32, you list the weapons for CRM. Is Autoshotgun not one that should appear here? And does it need its own Autoshotgun(Weapon) appearance? And would it go under Rifleman too? If the autoshotgun is meant to be covered under Shotgun, the skill description should say so too. Autoshotgun appears as a discrete entry in the weapon table.
Your page 44 errata has no bolding. Perhaps this is intentional, but I assume not.
What skill fires Flamethrower and where is this made explicit? (My guess is it should be covered under Heavy Weapons but isn't) There should probably also be some rules for what happens when someone wearing one gets hit with an attack...
What skill fires CPR guns? Where is this made explicit? Why is there not a "CPR Gun" skill?
They are NOT covered by Mortars and Howitzers (as they are direct fire Hivels).
Should it be made explicit that Grenade Launcher includes normal GL, RAM GL, Auto GL and RAM Auto GL?
Should it be made explicit that Heavy Weapons, which covers machine guns, includes Light, Heavy and Gatling variants? (Just to be blatantly obvious, like the GL question above)
Should Tac Missile launchers be mentioned under Heavy Weapons? They don't really ever provide a table for these and yet there are a staple of the Traveller universe. I'd suggest Heavy Weapons. They appear in a number of canonical sources and I imagine FF&S could design them. Striker could. (By this, I'm not talking direct fire GLs, but Javelin, TOW, Hellfire, etc).
What skill governs rifle grenades? Rifle or Grenade Launcher or both?
What skill governs Recoilless Rifle? I don't believe it is Mortars and Howitzers, but it could work under the suggested CPR Guns skill. Or maybe under Heavy Weapons (sort of depends on size... but with minimum 60mm, I'd say CPR Guns or both).
What skill governs MRLs? An MRL is basically a rocket mortar. But since MRLs are in the weapon tables, this should be explicitly stated under Mortars and Howitzers.
Is there any task to emplace a mine successfully, perhaps a hazardous routine task with Dex and Demo as modifiers? Or a simple task, if you think they're easier to place?
Should all Marine acquisitions of Vacc Suit be Battle Dress?
On pg 32, you list the weapons for CRM. Is Autoshotgun not one that should appear here? And does it need its own Autoshotgun(Weapon) appearance? And would it go under Rifleman too? If the autoshotgun is meant to be covered under Shotgun, the skill description should say so too. Autoshotgun appears as a discrete entry in the weapon table.
Your page 44 errata has no bolding. Perhaps this is intentional, but I assume not.
What skill fires Flamethrower and where is this made explicit? (My guess is it should be covered under Heavy Weapons but isn't) There should probably also be some rules for what happens when someone wearing one gets hit with an attack...
What skill fires CPR guns? Where is this made explicit? Why is there not a "CPR Gun" skill?
They are NOT covered by Mortars and Howitzers (as they are direct fire Hivels).
Should it be made explicit that Grenade Launcher includes normal GL, RAM GL, Auto GL and RAM Auto GL?
Should it be made explicit that Heavy Weapons, which covers machine guns, includes Light, Heavy and Gatling variants? (Just to be blatantly obvious, like the GL question above)
Should Tac Missile launchers be mentioned under Heavy Weapons? They don't really ever provide a table for these and yet there are a staple of the Traveller universe. I'd suggest Heavy Weapons. They appear in a number of canonical sources and I imagine FF&S could design them. Striker could. (By this, I'm not talking direct fire GLs, but Javelin, TOW, Hellfire, etc).
What skill governs rifle grenades? Rifle or Grenade Launcher or both?
What skill governs Recoilless Rifle? I don't believe it is Mortars and Howitzers, but it could work under the suggested CPR Guns skill. Or maybe under Heavy Weapons (sort of depends on size... but with minimum 60mm, I'd say CPR Guns or both).
What skill governs MRLs? An MRL is basically a rocket mortar. But since MRLs are in the weapon tables, this should be explicitly stated under Mortars and Howitzers.
Is there any task to emplace a mine successfully, perhaps a hazardous routine task with Dex and Demo as modifiers? Or a simple task, if you think they're easier to place?
Should all Marine acquisitions of Vacc Suit be Battle Dress?
WHEW! More issues for version 2.09?Originally posted by kaladorn:
Don, nice work, but more comments:
Wow... I got to bask in the glow of a job well done for hours...
On pg 32, you list the weapons for CRM. Is Autoshotgun not one that should appear here? And does it need its own Autoshotgun(Weapon) appearance? And would it go under Rifleman too? If the autoshotgun is meant to be covered under Shotgun, the skill description should say so too. Autoshotgun appears as a discrete entry in the weapon table.
Excellent points all; let's treat Autoshotgun in the same way that Autorifle has been treated, and go from there. So...
Autoshotgun (Weapon): The individual can use a shotgun.
And Rifleman and Combat Rifleman both need Autoshotgun added to their Includes list.
Your page 44 errata has no bolding. Perhaps this is intentional, but I assume not.
No, that's a goof. Thanks...
What skill fires Flamethrower and where is this made explicit? (My guess is it should be covered under Heavy Weapons but isn't) There should probably also be some rules for what happens when someone wearing one gets hit with an attack...
I agree with Heavy Weapons, but as for rules when someone wearing one gets hit, I suspect that's addenda.
What skill fires CPR guns? Where is this made explicit? Why is there not a "CPR Gun" skill?
They are NOT covered by Mortars and Howitzers (as they are direct fire Hivels).
Wow... I don't know how many times this has come up in my MegaTraveller campaigns...
I'm tempted to lump them in with Mass Drivers; in fact, TNE's Heavy Guns skill is Mass Drivers and CPR Guns. It's a good question, but definitely addenda.
Should it be made explicit that Grenade Launcher includes normal GL, RAM GL, Auto GL and RAM Auto GL?
Does it need to be? The table is named "Grenade Launchers".
Should it be made explicit that Heavy Weapons, which covers machine guns, includes Light, Heavy and Gatling variants? (Just to be blatantly obvious, like the GL question above)
This really isn't the same, as "Gatling Gun" appears as a separate item. The text of the Machine Gun skill should amended...
Machine Gun (Weapon): The individual can use machine guns and gatling guns.
Should Tac Missile launchers be mentioned under Heavy Weapons? They don't really ever provide a table for these and yet there are a staple of the Traveller universe. I'd suggest Heavy Weapons. They appear in a number of canonical sources and I imagine FF&S could design them. Striker could. (By this, I'm not talking direct fire GLs, but Javelin, TOW, Hellfire, etc).
Fortunately, I don't have to worry about FF&S
Note that under PROBLEMS I note the need to incorporate Tac Missiles from MTJ #3.
What skill governs rifle grenades? Rifle or Grenade Launcher or both?
An excellent question that would be addenda if there were an obvious answer.
What skill governs Recoilless Rifle? I don't believe it is Mortars and Howitzers, but it could work under the suggested CPR Guns skill. Or maybe under Heavy Weapons (sort of depends on size... but with minimum 60mm, I'd say CPR Guns or both).
Could you live with CPR Guns, Recoilless Rifles and Mass Drivers in the same skill?
What skill governs MRLs? An MRL is basically a rocket mortar. But since MRLs are in the weapon tables, this should be explicitly stated under Mortars and Howitzers.
I could live with Mortars and Howitzers, but that's addenda.
Is there any task to emplace a mine successfully, perhaps a hazardous routine task with Dex and Demo as modifiers? Or a simple task, if you think they're easier to place?
According to MTJ #4, that's for the individual referee to determine, bearing in mind local conditions and information.
Should all Marine acquisitions of Vacc Suit be Battle Dress?
Interestingly enough, the notes indicate the answer is NO. The argument is that Marines get Vacc Suit training from the Navy, and then receive BD training from the Marines. There's a good argument for requiring Vacc Suit-1 before allowing taking BD-1, but no "rule" is ever explicitly defined. I think making the Special Combat cascade available closes this issue.
Rifle Grenades: They're fired as an indirect fire item (I remember grandad describing the rifle grenades used in WWI which he fought with in the Low Countries and Germany) and probably are closest to Grenade Launcher skill.
CPR Guns: I think the mass driver is just a faster rate or heavier electrically driven direct fire weapon. I think you could put it under 'Direct Fire Artillery' which could have 'includes Mass Drivers, CPR Guns, and Recoilless Rifles'.
Flamethrower: Just add it under heavy weapons. We can talk about how to handle the 'human candle' effect afterwards.
Mines: I still think a baseline task should be provided as an example. Yes, it is addenda, but pretty useful addenda. I'll try to dig out Striker and see if those rules had anything about emplacing mines or if T2K has any useful guidelines.
Vacc vs. BD: I guess I can see it, but it sucks. You can end up with a character with BD-3, Vacc Suit-1, utterly wasting a skill level. This is analogous to Pilot-3, Ship's Boat-1. Both are kind of dumb situations.
MRLs: Small MRL is like a Nebelwerfer which was always called a rocket assisted mortar. Large MRL is like one of the modern US MRLs and that's more along the lines of rocket assisted howitzer (not quite, more GMS with the smart guided rounds of today, but close enough for government work).
I'm just trying to patch the holes so that every weapon that appears on the weapon tables has an applicable skill to fire it.
CPR Guns: I think the mass driver is just a faster rate or heavier electrically driven direct fire weapon. I think you could put it under 'Direct Fire Artillery' which could have 'includes Mass Drivers, CPR Guns, and Recoilless Rifles'.
Flamethrower: Just add it under heavy weapons. We can talk about how to handle the 'human candle' effect afterwards.
Mines: I still think a baseline task should be provided as an example. Yes, it is addenda, but pretty useful addenda. I'll try to dig out Striker and see if those rules had anything about emplacing mines or if T2K has any useful guidelines.
Vacc vs. BD: I guess I can see it, but it sucks. You can end up with a character with BD-3, Vacc Suit-1, utterly wasting a skill level. This is analogous to Pilot-3, Ship's Boat-1. Both are kind of dumb situations.
MRLs: Small MRL is like a Nebelwerfer which was always called a rocket assisted mortar. Large MRL is like one of the modern US MRLs and that's more along the lines of rocket assisted howitzer (not quite, more GMS with the smart guided rounds of today, but close enough for government work).
I'm just trying to patch the holes so that every weapon that appears on the weapon tables has an applicable skill to fire it.
Reg Redblade
SOC-8
Dom,
Thank you for your hard work on this - it is very much appreciated.
A quick one:
On page 17 - the basic world atmosphere data column.
I notice that it omits reference to tainted atmospheres
I don't have the books here in front of me but if memory serves the odd number atmos (5,7,9,) have the atmosphere type then the caveat.
ie. 5 Thin (tainted)
Unless this was deliberately left out of this table because it's a basic one ?
I will look over the rest over the next few days.
RR
Thank you for your hard work on this - it is very much appreciated.
A quick one:
On page 17 - the basic world atmosphere data column.
I notice that it omits reference to tainted atmospheres
I don't have the books here in front of me but if memory serves the odd number atmos (5,7,9,) have the atmosphere type then the caveat.
ie. 5 Thin (tainted)
Unless this was deliberately left out of this table because it's a basic one ?
I will look over the rest over the next few days.
RR
Reg Redblade
SOC-8
Dom,
Thank you for your hard work on this - it is very much appreciated.
A quick one:
On page 17 - the basic world atmosphere data column.
I notice that it omits reference to tainted atmospheres
I don't have the books here in front of me but if memory serves the odd number atmos (5,7,9,) have the atmosphere type then the caveat.
ie. 5 Thin (tainted)
Unless this was deliberately left out of this table because it's a basic one ?
I will look over the rest over the next few days.
RR
Thank you for your hard work on this - it is very much appreciated.
A quick one:
On page 17 - the basic world atmosphere data column.
I notice that it omits reference to tainted atmospheres
I don't have the books here in front of me but if memory serves the odd number atmos (5,7,9,) have the atmosphere type then the caveat.
ie. 5 Thin (tainted)
Unless this was deliberately left out of this table because it's a basic one ?
I will look over the rest over the next few days.
RR
Similar threads
MT Only:
My MT Errata Odyssey
