Missing Tech in OTU
- Thread starter BardicHeart
- Start date
Here's a synopsis:
You: (Incorrect claim) OTU visual and IR sensors suck, especially in MGT. We can do better at TL 6.
Me: (Correction) From the CT Zho module, OTU sensors can detect gas giants out to 3 parsecs. We can't do that now.
You: (Backpedaling) The Zho module is not the main rules.
Me: (Further correction) Zho module is the main rules, that's how CT worked.
You: (Non sequitor written to avoid acknowledging that original claim was wrong) MT grav sensors yadda yadda yadda blah blah blah
Me: (Gentle nudge to return you to the actual discussion regrading your original incorrect claim) Is that in the main rules? (Emoticon used to add humor)
You'll now point out that the rules in the Zho module don't specifically mention visual and IR sensors.
Have you admitted your original claim was wrong yet?
Take you time. Climbing down from your high horse can be dangerous. :rofl:
Ignorance of obscure and hard to get modules is, indeed, a perfectly good excuse. Of course, what HG ought to do (once you've actually quoted the relevant rules, so he can be sure you're not misinterpreting something) is to amend his claim to include his new knowledge. Something like, say, "With the exception of the contradictory rules in CT:Zhodani, visual & IR sensors are laughably low tech in most Traveller versions, especially in MGT. More akin to TL 6."
Or he could substantiate his claim by quoting CT sensor rules that are inconsistent with being able to detect gas giants at 3 parsecs.
Hans
Actually, we've detected GG's out to 10pc or more at present. And generally, we meet the definitions (equipment wise) of TL 7.
By the way, same range for detecting GG's are in Adv 1 as well: up to 3 parsecs.
It's better than present because it takes only a couple days, instead of the months it takes current systems to do so... but a 2x2m interferometer should be able to resolve optically gas giants to 10pc or so...
Too bad Adv. 1 is an obscure and hard to get module otherwise more people would know about the rule.
Oh dear, you inadvertently overlooked the rest of Wil's post. You know, the bit where he contradicts your assertations and more or less agrees with HG?
Anyway, more people would know about the rule if they had read the adventure from cover to cover and taken note of everything it said. For my part, however, I've browsed through it a couple of times and still haven't found it. Can yuo provide a page reference, Wil?
Hans
BardicHeart
SOC-12
General observations...
It seems like some of the technologies people want actually are there, just not in the obvious "in your face" ways many are accustomed to with most sci-fi.
Taking nanotech for example, carbon nanotubes ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_nanotube ) are probably there in the development of electronics, building materials and so forth... but its not "visible" within the game. There is no "grey goo" or replicators which are the staple of popular sci-fi nanotech.
Perhaps what really needs to be changed is the descriptions of various items. For example TL 10 - molecular nanochips... molecular bonding allows microchips to be printed with transistors 100 times smaller and in turn allowed nanochips which has 10,000 times as many transistors than were previously possible. Or..
TL - 8... people finally realized that microscopic "nanites" were never going to be the "miracle robots" that could build anything out of anything. Nanites, while useful are far more limited, and aren't really robots at all... more like molecular "tools" that are good for the specific functions for which they were designed. There would never be any "grey goo"
TL - 25... Grandfather invented Grey goo... just to prove he could. :rofl:
Simple descriptions like that would make clearer the role of nanotech as well as some of the limitations. I do however think there is a balance point with such descriptions beyond which you start painting yourself into a corner. Describe things too precisely and you leave no room for future development.
I'd like to see a similar treatment of genetics and genetic engineering. Scattered around are various references to experiments at altering humans to live on different worlds, cloning and so forth. What are the Imperial laws regarding genetic engineering in crops? animals? humans? What do the Solomani think of it? Is there possibly a Solomani Melliorare (Alan Dean Foster's Humanx novels, i.e. For Love of Mother-Not) trying to create Solomani supermen?
Just some thoughts.
It seems like some of the technologies people want actually are there, just not in the obvious "in your face" ways many are accustomed to with most sci-fi.
Taking nanotech for example, carbon nanotubes ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_nanotube ) are probably there in the development of electronics, building materials and so forth... but its not "visible" within the game. There is no "grey goo" or replicators which are the staple of popular sci-fi nanotech.
Perhaps what really needs to be changed is the descriptions of various items. For example TL 10 - molecular nanochips... molecular bonding allows microchips to be printed with transistors 100 times smaller and in turn allowed nanochips which has 10,000 times as many transistors than were previously possible. Or..
TL - 8... people finally realized that microscopic "nanites" were never going to be the "miracle robots" that could build anything out of anything. Nanites, while useful are far more limited, and aren't really robots at all... more like molecular "tools" that are good for the specific functions for which they were designed.
There would never be any "grey goo"TL - 25... Grandfather invented Grey goo... just to prove he could. :rofl:
Simple descriptions like that would make clearer the role of nanotech as well as some of the limitations. I do however think there is a balance point with such descriptions beyond which you start painting yourself into a corner. Describe things too precisely and you leave no room for future development.
I'd like to see a similar treatment of genetics and genetic engineering. Scattered around are various references to experiments at altering humans to live on different worlds, cloning and so forth. What are the Imperial laws regarding genetic engineering in crops? animals? humans? What do the Solomani think of it? Is there possibly a Solomani Melliorare (Alan Dean Foster's Humanx novels, i.e. For Love of Mother-Not) trying to create Solomani supermen?
Just some thoughts.
No, I meant this part:
And this part:
Hence I used the qualifier "more or less" in an attempt to forestall obfuscation. Oh well, it was worth a try.orr said:
Hans
There's a really old thread here I found about robots which explained their lack in the OTU that way.
That's a good idea. Of course it ties a GMs hands now and in the future when things might have changed. Sometimes being vague is the way to go.
Excellent!
Loren Wiseman once remarked that could be something that isn't "in your face" too. He mentioned things like birth defects or heart disease being slowly geneered out of humanity, rather ironic given his near heart attack last year.
Yes, the Solomani & Aslan book for MT has a lot of them as do many others again. Again, most examples might not be "in your face".
I know one of the Library Data entries about Imperial Research Stations mentions animal research or some such. The Imperium doesn't seem to outright prohibit much, most likely to keep it's options open. Maybe any geneering "laws" are like those robot accords? Individual worlds enact them as laws and the Imperium views them as guidelines?
More strict and more lenient I think.
The Solomani and Aslan book has them geneering humans with built in "foghorns" so they could communicate long distances after settling a world where radios don't work well for some reason. That's a pretty trivial reason when you think of it, so it seems there's a low hurdle to creating "funnies".
On the other hand, the Party and it's monitors active everywhere and the Confederation is supposed to be more involved in day-to-day business of worlds too.
I'm thinking you can get permission to build human funnies easily enough, but you definitely need permission. So, more lenient and more strict.
So you cherry picked the range requirement while deliberately ignoring the time component? Okay.
The Zho module states ships can detect gas giants out to three parsecs with no time interval specified. The navigator in the example determines which hexes have systems and then rolls for gas giant detection modified by her computer. Nothing else. No task because it's CT and no time interval either.
The players and referee map the systems on their maps; the navigator use the computer to determine where gas giants are; the group prepares for its next jump.
What I wrote stands. Detecting gas giants in months out to 10 parsecs is not the same as detecting gas giants instantly out to three parsecs and we cannot do that now.
BardicHeart
SOC-12
That's the tough part, wording it so that its almost an oblique reference, not too detailled, but some examples sufficient to make clear basically this...
Nanotech is there, its just not grey goo or replicators.
Which seems to be the emerging concensus in this discussion. It would make the descriptions more "filler", but that can be a good thing. Filler helps flesh out the setting and helps give Refs the "gritty" details that add a feeling of more realism to a setting.
Could be. I was also half wondering about things like social reaction to it. For example, in the real world today there's a sort of "rebellion" by some against any food that has been genetically engineered. It scares some people. Does this happen in the Imperium? Are there "terrorist" groups that blow up labs that do research on genetic engineering for food or animals? Are there bored rich kids who see RNA engineering to change superficial features as the new "tattoo" fad? Things like that can add a lot of "color" to a campaign setting. Again, just general thoughts and ideas I'm throwing out for discussion.
Fading Suns has a couple of source books on this sort of thing, might be an an interesting idea for some new Traveller books.
Since I don't have Zhodani and you haven't provided a quote, I don't know what exactly the text says. I suspect it doesn't say that the process is instantaneously but merely imply that it can be performed in the time a ship usually spends between jumps. That is to say, one week.
Certainly it's not reasonable to believe that a technology that can't detect a starship at 600,000km in 20 minutes would be able to detect a gas giant at 3 parsecs instantaneously.
No, but it is comparable to detecting gas giants at three parsecs in a week. I don't know what method is used to detect gas giants, but if it's something to do with vision, it should be about ten times easier to detect something at 3 parsecs than at 10 parsecs, shouldn't it? The square of the ratio?
Hans
Xerxeskingofking
SOC-13
modern day, methods for detecting gas giants rely on detecting the wobble in the star caused by the gas giant moving along its orbit.
however, this method is only currently able to detect gas giants very close to the star in question: ones with orbital distantaces within the orbit of Mercury. look up "hot jupiters" so find out more.
in short, any starship mounted sensor being able to detect a gas giant orbiting at the distance of Jupiter is massively more senseitive than anything we can do now.
however, this method is only currently able to detect gas giants very close to the star in question: ones with orbital distantaces within the orbit of Mercury. look up "hot jupiters" so find out more.
in short, any starship mounted sensor being able to detect a gas giant orbiting at the distance of Jupiter is massively more senseitive than anything we can do now.
