Traveller Store CotI Features New Posts Mark Forums Read Register

Go Back > Citizens of the Imperium > General Traveller Discussions > In the OTU

In the OTU In the Official Traveller Universe. Any milieux that's been published in any edition. Not for discussion of rules except in reference to how they reflect the OTU

Thread Tools Display Modes
Old March 16th, 2017, 02:23 PM
Straybow's Avatar
Straybow Straybow is offline
Citizen: SOC-14
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: not too hot, not too cold
Posts: 1,461
Gallery : 0
Straybow Citizen

Interesting, that's the first anyone here has mentioned that the rule was clarified in 1981. And the first anyone has quoted MWM saying that the economics should make sense... but then he writes an adventure in which his description of how it works sabotages the economics.
Originally Posted by creativehum View Post
But here is the things: Straybow isn't hanging his hat on the Type M. He's looking at the sentences alone and saying it is by parsec.

Now, if your answer to my question about the cost of Middle Passage for a Jump 3 journey is the same as Straybow's, I'm curious how he squares that answer with the quote I posted, a quote that makes it explicit and clear that a Jump 3 Middle Passage journey will cost Cr8,000.

Leaving aside the shenanigans of the 1977 Type M I'm not sure how anyone can assume a single jump, no matter what the distance, is going to cost Cr24,000.

Of course, I havne't heard from Straybow yet, and am curious what he will say about this.
Actually, that's only half. I'm hanging my hat on 1) what makes sense, economically, and 2) what the actual words of the sentence are. Words have meaning, sentences organize meaning, and hopefully convey ideas.

Regarding the former, it never occurred to us (a handful of players who never went beyond 3 LBBs, and I don't think we played after 1981) that it wouldn't be per parsec. And, as I said previously, the latter is a specific and clear example. I give weight to specific over general, I interpret anything general that is unclear in the light of what is clear.

The specific example is for a destination 3 parsecs away, and says the J3 and J1 charge the same passage price. J1 always charges per parsec, therefore J3 also charges per parsec. If middle passage is listed as kCr8, then middle passage to the destination 3 parsecs away is kCr24. The last sentence of the paragraph lumps cargo in with passenger service, so cargo is carried and charged per parsec as well.
(\__/). Save a bunny, eat more Smurf! (Brought to you by the National Smurfmeat Council)
(='.'=) Smurf, the original blue meat! 1999, and (except that "Smurf" bit)
(")_(") tc+ ru- c+ au+ ls- pi he++ eti=0 !zuchai(=dilithium)
Reply With Quote
Old March 16th, 2017, 08:34 PM
creativehum's Avatar
creativehum creativehum is offline
Citizen: SOC-13
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 905
Gallery : 2
creativehum Citizen+creativehum Citizen+creativehum Citizen+

This conversation is clearly off the rails.

But since I'm in this far, I wanted to finish.

Here is a magic trick:

When reading either the 1977 rules or the 1981 rules define two words thusly:
Passage: The conveyance of a passenger from one world to another in one jump.
Destination: A world that can be reached by a starship from a given world in a one jump.

If one reads the text of either the 1977 rules or the 1981 rules and uses those definitions every time one reads the words "passage" or "destination" an amazing thing will happen:
Everything falls into place.
There is no confusion. There is no ambiguity. There are no explanations or Talmudic readings required. The rules (even for the 1977 edition!) make perfect sense:

"Passage is always sold on the basis of transport to the announced destination, rather than on the basis of jump distance…" (1977)
So, what is the cost of High Passage wether one is jumping 1 parsec, 2 parsecs, or three parsecs? Cr10,000. Always.
"The difference is that a jump-3 ship can reach a destination in one jump that would take the jump-1 ship three separate jumps (through two intermediate destinations) to reach." (1977)
If a passenger is going to a world three parsecs away via Middle Passage on a jump-3 ship what how much will he pay? Cr8,000. If he travels to the same world via middle passage on a jump-1 ship in the example above, how much does he pay? Cr24,000. Because each jump to each of the three destinations requires the purchase of a new passage.
"Differences in starship jump drive capacity have no specific effect on passage prices. That is to say, a starship with a jump drive of 3 charges the same passage price as a starship with a jump drive of 1."(1977)
In the example given, both ships are traveling to a world 1 parsec away. (A 1 parsec trip is the only type of passage a jump-1 ship can make.) Despite the fact that the jump-3 ship has a higher drive capacity, the fare is the same, because passage prices are set by single jump to a single destination, not by the drive capacity of the ship.
"Starship masters may inquire at a starport to determine the size and number of shipments awaiting transportation, and their destination. The referee should determine all worlds accessible to the starship (depending on jump number)..." (1977)
Destination is defined as worlds a starship can reach in one jump. The number of worlds a ship can reach will depend on its jump number. (Jump-2 ships will be able to reach destinations that a jump-1 ship cannot, and so on.)
The Referee rolls for the finite number of destinations for a given ship. The starship master picks one, announces it will be shipping off for that destination in the next few days. Passengers present themselves, paying the fare of a particular passage price for the journey to that world. The journey will take one week's time in jump space. The distance traveled will not affect the price (per the first quote above). "Cargo is shipped at a rate of CR 1000 per ton" (1977) with no other mention of any variance in price due to any other factor. So the cargo is loaded onto the ship, the ship makes one jump to the destination world, the cargo is unloaded on that destination world, and that's that.

As for speculation, it belongs to the ship. He can carry it in his hold as long as he wishes until he finds a world that he considers the best shot for making a profit.

This reading has no concern for the Type M not working, or the feeling someone has that the rules don't make sense. Those are separate issues, and if one has concerns about the Type M or the economics not making sense, one can certainly (and should) shift whatever elements around until one is content.

But as to the rules as written using the definitions of Passage and Destination described above, it has one strong advantage over other interpretations offered so far on this thread: it simply works. No interpretive-shenanigans have to be performed. No contradictory sentences have to be tossed out or ignored. There is nothing subtle about the wording, nor anything lacking precision. Moreover, definitions are found within the text and made explicit by the fact that when using these two definition the whole makes sense.

Try it!

That's all.

Happy Gaming!
TRAVELLER: Out of the Box. Lots of blog posts about original Traveller and playing with Traveller Books 1-3.
"The beauty of CT LBB s1-3 is that the ref is free to make such decisions for themselves." -- Mike Wightman
"The beauty of CT LBBs 1-3 is that the ref must make most of the decisions himself." -- flykiller

Last edited by creativehum; March 18th, 2017 at 02:30 PM..
Reply With Quote
Old March 19th, 2017, 11:26 AM
warwizard warwizard is offline
Citizen: SOC-13
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Round Rock
Posts: 682
Gallery : 0
warwizard Citizen

Having just read all 19 pages of this discussion in one sitting I find that I have been drawn to rather extensive ship design efforts to make ships that could indeed be profitable with higher jump numbers using the 1000 CR per displacement ton per entry into jump space. The per parsec pricing model removes this incentive to come up with innovative ship designs.

I have always looked at the published subsidized trader as a flawed design that is a white elephant, somebody buys it and goes broke, sells it on to the next sucker. Eventually it is bought at a price that allows it to be successful in some niche, or the subsidizing government nationalizes it and crews it and it no longer cares about something as crass as profit.

I have done things like using the crew rules to build 100 Dt starships with one crewman and external demountable cargo modules having the volume of 200 Dt, doing J-1 at minimal tech level... some 210 Dt of cargo shipped with costs around 50k. Or a larger ship at TL-15 using a much larger drive to allow flexibility to carry external cargoes and drop tanks such that you pick the ship's jump performance to match the next destination's distance, with a lighter service to bring a fully loaded set of cargo modules and drop tanks and haul off the inbound ones, allowing a turn around time of a day or three instead of a week, (depending on the navigator doing well or poorly on the navigation roll, you may get over 40 jumps a year...).

Obviously these designs represent a fringe the first of someone that is a shoestring single owner aboard, and the other of the trading empire PC group that has made SO much money on trade and speculation they have these purpose built ships to squeeze every credit out of markets others cannot service.

I do this because the economic rules, (as stated previously), are not written for use with different size ships in mind, so I was interested in seeing the limit of what could be supported, at each extreme of smaller and larger and longer legs, and I've tried this with each successive set of rules that comes out, so I'm not a CT or MT or T4 or T5 specific, I've designed in all, but T4 FF&S gives the most bells and whistles to detail weird designs.

Sure I'll carry your cargo in my hold from Glisten to Egypt for CR 1000 per Dt. because I'm just using your cargo to fill in the holds that were not filled with my speculative or contracted cargo (mail perhaps).

Now someone mentioned up thread that fuel purifiers were a thing but they took up valuable cargo space and raised the ship's costs for both financing and engineering and maintenance crew. T4 FF&S you can design the purifier installation to take a week to purify a fuel load instead of the standard 6 hours so only 1/24 th. the size and cost (subject to minimum sizes per each tech level), so you can build larger ships with a modular fuel purifier with the difference being the time it takes to refine the fuel. I can see a 1000 Dt design intended for frontier world service set up as a mothership / jump frame with the riders providing the refueling and cargo delivery/ force protection. The challenge is to make it profitable under the 1000 Cr/ jump entry. :-)
His Grace Duke of Glisten by the hand of his IM Strephon in 1116.

IMTU tc !23 mgt- mt+ TNE+ T4++ T20- T5 ?T5LBB ?tp tg-- ?th ?to ru ge++ !3i+ c++ jt- au+ ls- pi+,-- ta- he+ ?kk ?hi as dr ?ith ?vr ?ne vg+ So++ Zh- Vi-- da Sy
*all non So humaniti are much closer related to Homo Nethanderalis than are So, and are immediately recognizable to So as "cavemen" complete with fur and the other morphological characteristics that were unimportant to Grandfather's need for a better servant
Reply With Quote


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
AHL - Lift up/down costs rsitalyct Traveller Wargames 1 May 10th, 2007 05:11 PM
Costs? kafka47 The Lone Star 0 June 22nd, 2005 12:56 PM
Hiring Costs Troubadour The Lone Star 5 January 22nd, 2004 10:45 PM

This website and its contents are copyright ©2010-2013 Far Future Enterprises. All rights reserved. Traveller is a registered trademark of Far Future Enterprises .
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright (c) 2010-2013, Far Future Enterprises. All Rights Reserved.