• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.

Nature of Jump Space and Normal Space

Per JTAS 24, it is multiple dimensions where entering a high energy dimension gets you further in the same time than a low energy dimension.

Kinda crazy when you get right down to it.

Why? A jump one ship, that misjumps, and gets a result that requires a 1d6 x 1d6 parsec misjump, could ultimately misjump 36 parsecs using only Jump 1 fuel requirements.

If it can be done by accident, eventually, it can be done by design. That however, seems to violate the basic principle of the Jump drive itself as far as Jump design goes. <shrug>
[...]

Ah well. Not OTU, but ideas for someone else's Traveller Universe.

Actually, those higher order jump drives canonically are called: Hop (10 Pc), skip (100 Pc), Leap (1000 Pc), Bound (10 kPc), Vault (100 kPc)... Hop 1 is TL17, Skip 1 TL 20. IIRC, it's +3 TL per echelon; fuel is the same 10% per Rating, with rating being in units of the above mentioned distance... Note that scatter on a success is pretty low, but still makes hop subject to 1-2 days inbound burn, versus the 1/2 day for jump. Skip is wide enough that a hop or jump drive is essential.
 
Actually, those higher order jump drives canonically are called: Hop (10 Pc), skip (100 Pc), Leap (1000 Pc), Bound (10 kPc), Vault (100 kPc)... Hop 1 is TL17, Skip 1 TL 20. IIRC, it's +3 TL per echelon; fuel is the same 10% per Rating, with rating being in units of the above mentioned distance... Note that scatter on a success is pretty low, but still makes hop subject to 1-2 days inbound burn, versus the 1/2 day for jump. Skip is wide enough that a hop or jump drive is essential.

If you're looking at T5, yes.

If you look at JTAS24, the more correct statement I should have made was that it is theorized that there are multiple higher level dimensions the pertinent quote is:

"It is this type of misjump that is used as evidence for a multiple jump space theory."

The throwaway comment about Jumps only being accurate to 1 part in 10 billion, or about 3,000 km for a 1 parsec jump, seems to imply that there always should have been some sort of scatter involved. The comment that the accuracy can degrade a 10 fold depending on other facts, means that the scatter probably should have been 3 t0 30 thousand km on a successful navigation skill roll.

I had to re-read the rules on Tasks for the MT rules, and found this to be interesting...

"Exceptional Failure: If the player's task roll fails, and is less than what is needed by 2 or more, then exceptional failure has occurred."

It appears that only on a hazardous task, does one roll on the mishap table, and a fumbled hazardous task results in a 3d roll on the mishap table rather than a 2d roll.

There is however, something of a disconnect in the rules from my casual reading of the rules in MT.

For safe tasks, a mishap results in a 1d6 roll on the mishap table. But on page 93 of IMPERIAL ENCYLOPEDIA, it has this to say about Engage Jump Drive:

"Safe Jump: A ship at least 100 diamters out from all massive bodies, using the proper fuel, and with properly maintained drives, can make a safe jump with no chance of a mishap"

Note that Engaging a Jump Drive is an Engineering Task, modified by Edu modifiers

To plot a course for the jump is:

"To compute the proper course for a starship making a jump: Routine, Navigation, Edu, 2 min (uncertain)." The problem is - that task description doesn't say anything about the effects of a mishap, and presumably, the task is required in order to qualify as "Jump Preparation" as listed on page 93.

So the only time a Jump mishap occurs, is if there is a failure by 2+ by the Engineer, not the navigator - precluding that process as being used to determine accuracy of jump rules for Traveller. :(

As for the Nature of Jump space in question, it is a nice piece of data to work with. :)
 
Hal, you're conflating safe jump and safe task; they are not the same.
Also, as introduced, but mistyped in MT rules, any exception failure on a non-safe is a mishap.
I think editing errors happened.
 
Back
Top