[TML] CT Sup 7, Crews room sizes.

[Richard Aiken]

On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 1:24 AM, Tom B <kaladorn at gmail.com> wrote:
> >  The jump drive _is_ the clincher.  Its cost is directly proportional
> >  to hull volume, and (in both the design systems I've used) by far the
> >  majority of the cost of the whole starship.  What's worse, the capital
> >  cost of the starship tends to be a substantial fraction of the
> >  lifetime running cost.
>
> Based on what assumption of lifespan?
>
> I'm not sure there is anywhere that suggests the maximum lifespan of a
> Traveller ship. I picture 200 year old Scouts still banging around
> somewhere, if properly maintained.

Ibid.  IMTU, the smaller standard ships have hulls of
several-inches-thick molded tool steel.  Why worry about hull mass
when you have access to Traveller drive tech?  Given minimal
maintenance, these are the equivalent of Energizer Bunnies (or Firefly
Class Transports).

But I still like 'em small.  With cargos as minor as they are (now)
IMTU, there's simply not much point to building bigger ships.  Plus,
unlike submarines (or future real world interplanetary craft), most
Traveller boats aren't "out in the black" for more than a week at a
time.

Yeah, someone might still go a little buggy if they couldn't step out
of this "blacked out RV" for a week.  But if you think about it, this
is an excellent in-game reason for having one or two "stewards" (i.e.
personal-combat-leaning PCs with no actual ship skills) aboard the
typical small boat.  The stewards are on hand to "keep passengers
calm" in the case of "an event" (i.e. wrestle the idiot to the deck
and take away his butter knife).

Of course, things get really entertaining if one of the *stewards*
wigs out . . . which is why you choose the most unimaginative folk
(i.e. munchkin gun bunnies) for this position as you can find.

-- 
Richard Aiken

"Never insult anyone by accident." Robert A. Heinlein