Re: [TML] Bettersituationalawareness
David Jaques-Watson
(20 Jul 2015 09:57 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Bettersituationalawareness
Kelly St. Clair
(20 Jul 2015 11:48 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Bettersituationalawareness
Craig Berry
(20 Jul 2015 15:38 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Bettersituationalawareness
Grimmund
(20 Jul 2015 16:33 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Bettersituationalawareness
Craig Berry
(20 Jul 2015 16:36 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Bettersituationalawareness
rupert.boleyn@xxxxxx
(20 Jul 2015 23:12 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Bettersituationalawareness
Craig Berry
(20 Jul 2015 23:19 UTC)
|
RE: [TML] Bettersituationalawareness
Anthony Jackson
(20 Jul 2015 23:30 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Bettersituationalawareness
Craig Berry
(20 Jul 2015 23:36 UTC)
|
RE: [TML] Bettersituationalawareness
Anthony Jackson
(20 Jul 2015 23:43 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Bettersituationalawareness
Craig Berry
(21 Jul 2015 00:01 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Bettersituationalawareness
Kelly St. Clair
(21 Jul 2015 00:20 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Bettersituationalawareness Phil Pugliese (21 Jul 2015 15:48 UTC)
|
Re: [TML]Bettersituationalawareness
Rob O'Connor
(21 Jul 2015 09:34 UTC)
|
Re: [TML]Bettersituationalawareness
rupert.boleyn@xxxxxx
(21 Jul 2015 14:05 UTC)
|
Re: [TML]Bettersituationalawareness
Richard Aiken
(21 Jul 2015 19:10 UTC)
|
Re: [TML]Bettersituationalawareness
Bruce Johnson
(21 Jul 2015 20:03 UTC)
|
Re: [TML]Bettersituationalawareness
Phil Pugliese
(21 Jul 2015 21:18 UTC)
|
Re: [TML]Bettersituationalawareness
Richard Aiken
(21 Jul 2015 21:41 UTC)
|
Re: [TML]Bettersituationalawareness
Bruce Johnson
(21 Jul 2015 22:19 UTC)
|
Re: [TML]Bettersituationalawareness
rupert.boleyn@xxxxxx
(21 Jul 2015 21:45 UTC)
|
Re: [TML]Bettersituationalawareness
Bruce Johnson
(21 Jul 2015 22:14 UTC)
|
Re: [TML]Bettersituationalawareness
Kurt Feltenberger
(21 Jul 2015 22:39 UTC)
|
Re: [TML]Bettersituationalawareness
Bruce Johnson
(21 Jul 2015 23:37 UTC)
|
Re: [TML]Bettersituationalawareness
shadow@xxxxxx
(22 Jul 2015 01:50 UTC)
|
Re:[TML]Bettersituationalawareness
Rob O'Connor
(23 Jul 2015 10:08 UTC)
|
Re: [TML]Bettersituationalawareness
Kurt Feltenberger
(21 Jul 2015 22:38 UTC)
|
Re: [TML]Bettersituationalawareness
Kurt Feltenberger
(21 Jul 2015 22:18 UTC)
|
Re: [TML]Bettersituationalawareness
Richard Aiken
(22 Jul 2015 00:50 UTC)
|
Re: [TML]Bettersituationalawareness
Kurt Feltenberger
(22 Jul 2015 01:06 UTC)
|
Re: [TML]Bettersituationalawareness
Phil Pugliese
(22 Jul 2015 14:16 UTC)
|
Re: [TML]Bettersituationalawareness
Kurt Feltenberger
(22 Jul 2015 16:08 UTC)
|
Re: [TML]Bettersituationalawareness
Phil Pugliese
(22 Jul 2015 22:02 UTC)
|
Re: [TML]Bettersituationalawareness
Kurt Feltenberger
(22 Jul 2015 22:31 UTC)
|
Re: [TML]Bettersituationalawareness
Richard Aiken
(24 Jul 2015 00:02 UTC)
|
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- And that pretty much sums up the problem w/ any gamesystem that has FTL. Just look at the progression of Traveller itself. As each iteration became more complicated in order to 'fix' previous exploits, even more new exploits were 'discovered'. It seemed as if the frequency of game/plot wrecking exploits was directly proportional to the level of complication. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ On Mon, 7/20/15, Craig Berry <xxxxxx@gmail.com> wrote: Subject: Re: [TML] Bettersituationalawareness To: xxxxxx@simplelists.com Date: Monday, July 20, 2015, 4:18 PM Well, both stutterwarps and reactionless drives would be off that list. :) The overarching trouble here is that any magical tech that violates currently known scientific laws will be "gameable". There will be exploits that let such a system do amazing, plot-wrecking things. If you patch the magic with more magic, you just change the set of exploits. On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 4:11 PM, <xxxxxx@gmail.com> wrote: On 20 Jul 2015 at 4:48, Kelly St. Clair wrote: > The kinetic energy in a 100 ton mass traveling at even a "mere" 1% of > c is... considerable. > > Long and short of it: space is big, really really big (down the road > to the chemist, etc etc). Any form of travel energetic enough to get > the PCs from point A to point B in a reasonable amount of time can > probably be converted, somehow, into a big enough BOOM to absolutely > ruin a lot of people's days. So it's really really hard to keep WMDs > out of the hands of adventurers, because they "need" one just to get > around the setting. 'Inertialess' systems like stutterwarps and so on are one way. They at least keep the required real velocity change for a ship down to the relative veocities of the stars and planets the ships are to visit. If you're playing a game where concerns about breaking physical as we understand them is a problem they are likely to be off the list, of course. ----- The Traveller Mailing List Archives at http://archives.simplelists.com/tml Report problems to xxxxxx@travellercentral.com To unsubscribe from this list please goto http://archives.simplelists.com -- Craig Berry (http://google.com/+CraigBerry) "Eternity is in love with the productions of time." - William Blake ----- The Traveller Mailing List Archives at http://archives.simplelists.com/tml Report problems to xxxxxx@travellercentral.com To unsubscribe from this list please goto http://www.simplelists.com/confirm.php?u=EwREIRgLK8vaUEhNlnoNdSGKwnjoID8a