[TML] Expanding the turret selection

[Jerry W Barrington]

On 7/15/08 1:36 AM, "Derek Wildstar" <wildstar at io.com> wrote:

> <big snip>

I think the difference in our approach to these rules can mostly be
summarized by I think your (and CT's) abstraction is *too* abstract.  :)

>>> 2.4.3 Fixed or flexible mounts on starships are considered
>>> suspicious within the Imperium.  Depending on location, this may
>>> consist of extra scrutiny, prejudice, or outright suspicion of
>>> Solomani sympathies.
>> 
>> If I typically land my small starship without using small craft,
>> then obviously my ship needs the capabilities of a normal small craft.
> 
> I don't understand what this has to do with weapons mounts.  Giving
> the starship the "capabilities of normal small craft" is a matter of
> streamlining and maneuver drive performance.

This was in reference to one rule saying small craft can freely use mounts
without suspicion.  If I use my starship as my landing craft, mounts are one
of the capabilities I meant.

> Finally, in the canonical Traveller universe, starships mounting fixed
> weapons are a Solomani innovation  (see CT Alien Module 6 for
> details).  The Solomani Rim War is not officially over - there has
> been a 100-odd-year cease-fire, but the Solomani Confederation's goals
> still include the re-conquest of Terra, and the Imperium still
> considers the Solomani Sphere as a rogue territory ... consider the
> relationship between the two as roughly analogous to Taiwan and
> China.  So touring the Imperium in a heavily-armed starship of
> Solomani origin is probably not a good way of being inconspicuous.
> 
>> And surely, in a map as big as Traveller's, there are a lot of
>> people besides Solomani who use mounts.
> 
> Not that I am aware of in the canon.

I don't buy it.  In that many thousands of worlds, with dozens, if not
hundreds, of distinct cultures, somebody besides Solomani would be using
mounts.

On the other hand, given that you repeatedly said that big ships don't need
them anyway, why are the Solomani using them?

> In addition to the "special landing permit" (Cr 1000+ for "any vessel
> that requires special procedures or processing") and "security
> fees" (Cr 500+ per day "to secure the docking bay"), in most law-
> abiding ports, any ship that looks like it might be trouble will
> almost certainly trigger a thorough inspection.  This obviously
> doesn't apply if the ship is in a pirate haven or other lawless area;
> licensed mercenary units are also excepted, because they have a clear
> business need to be heavily armed.
> 
> Most ships can be cited for _some_ infraction, from grease deposits in
> the galley to neglecting to correctly document auxiliary thermal
> exhaust port inspections.  The ship will be cited and fined for any
> violations found; warnings will not be given.  If the ship contains no
> violations, it is likely that an inspector will find one anyway.
> Depending on where the ship is, attempting to bribe port authorities
> may help; appealing the fine probably will not.
> 
> The Imperial Rules of War absolutely prohibit the use of weapons of
> mass destruction, and permit limited wars and mercenary involvement so
> long as the conflict does not disrupt interstellar trade.  However,
> the "Rules of War" are intentionally unwritten and subjective, to
> allow local officials maximum flexibility.  A "weapon of mass
> destruction" is what the Imperial officials on the spot say it is.
> 
> In orbit around a world with trace or no atmosphere, a particle
> accelerator differs from a nuclear weapon only in that the former is
> capable of pin-point accuracy and scalpel-like precision.  Striker's
> only rule for using PAWS in support of ground troops says "If one side
> has a particle accelerator in orbit around a trace or vacuum
> atmosphere world, the other side should surrender" (the converse being
> that it is ineffective against planets with an atmosphere).  So,
> particle accelerators are only useful:
> 1) against vessels and installations in space, or
> 2) as weapons of mass destruction against planets with little or no
> atmosphere.

We obviously have very different ideas on WMD.  They are generally
associated with large-scale indiscriminate destruction.  No "pin-point
accuracy and scalpel-like precision".  Besides, you said they were
"considered one step below weapons of mass destruction in the Imperial Rules
of War".  By definition, 1 step below X isn't X.

> Thus, particle accelerator weapons are not very compatible with the
> kind of limited conflict permitted under the Imperial Rules of War.
> Mercenary units within the Imperium that have PAWS are therefore
> likely to be doing something shady, and should have their activities
> monitored or their licenses pulled pending a full examination.
> Civilian ships with particle accelerators can reasonably presumed to
> be pirate (or otherwise up to no good), and can be held under the
> provision that authorizes Imperial agents to protect interstellar
> trade and shipping.
> 
> IMTU, Imperial citizens in either of the above situations are at least
> guaranteed a trial.  Non-citizens have no rights, and can be disposed
> of in any way that the authorities see fit.  If the non-citizens are
> lucky, it may be deportation to their homeworld, if it is nearby.  If
> not, they may just be unceremoniously dumped on a nearby colony or
> prison planet.
> 
> The general Imperial mandate to protect and foster interstellar trade
> always applies.  The Imperium, at least by it's own definition, does a
> good enough job at protecting interstellar trade.  If your ship
> carries significantly more firepower than most other ships in the
> area, then it's a reasonable assumption that you're up to no good ...
> and Imperial officials are authorized to take whatever steps they, in
> their on-the-spot judgement, feel are necessary to secure deep space
> for interstellar trade.

I just can't see an empire this large functioning without a strong rule of
law.  The vast majority of residents not being citizens doesn't fit into
that scheme for me.  Neither does a flock of Judge Dredds making up the
rules as they go.  In they world you describe, pretty much any Imperial
representative can be reasonably assumed to be "up to no good" from the
viewpoint of the vast majority of people.  There should be a lot of
assassination of Imperial reps.

> Referee fiat always applies, and sometimes things that are allowed in
> the rules are just plain impossible: the soliton pulse modulator
> interferes with the gravimetric collapse function, and it just doesn't
> work (for the good of the game).  ;-)

Much of that and you don't even have rules.  You just have whatever the GM
said this time.