Drinaxian Compnaion

Discuss the Traveller RPG and its many settings
Banded Mongoose
Posts: 203
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2018 11:52 am

Re: Drinaxian Compnaion

Postby MonkeyX » Thu Jul 02, 2020 10:00 pm

Rorix write up page 188. There seems to be a mistake in the sentence “However, it was not intended for direct combat against and carried less armor.” Should this have the “against” removed or something g like “enemies” or “ships” added?
User avatar
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2017 4:19 am

Re: Drinaxian Compnaion

Postby corsair1973 » Fri Jul 03, 2020 5:50 pm

Is there a reason the harrier upgrade options found in the Harrier Class Commerce Raider ebook (chapter 5) are missing from the Drinax companion? Everything else seems to be included.
Posts: 165
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2018 8:48 pm

Re: Drinaxian Compnaion

Postby Geir » Sat Jul 04, 2020 12:32 am

More Drinaxian Companion Errata (and now I'm done, I think - got to the last page anyway).

Warning: I go on a little, um, I wouldn't say "rambling tirade" really, but… you be the judge, on the PWH, but I do get to a recommendation.
I think I removed comments that didn't provided additional information (or comment) about things already noted by others, but I may have missed a few. Sorry.

p. 11: Security deactivation: So it would take an expert 100 hours to replace the security system on a free trader? That's 2.5 weeks of effort - see my ,um, commentary below, (p. 81-88)

p. 20: map: Marduk is TL 5, Pourne is a dry world (well, no water, anyway)

p. 36 map, in addition to previous comments about this page: Theev is a water world

p. 55 Dorsal Barbette: "re-rolls any damage dice of a 1 or 2" Accurate High Yield means that damage dice that are rolled as 1 are changed to 2.

p. 57 Magazine: "in the Vent mounting" Ventral Turret?

p. 64 First Pilot: "combat. the" Capitalize The

p. 75: I really like the refueling table. However, it adds yet another standard for gas giant refueling, very different from the one in the Traveller Companion. I like this one better, since it no longer makes gas giant refueling a good way to wreck your ship, just a roll to see how much fuel you get, though I suppose an Effect that leads to negative fuel gathered would be some sort of mishap. This table is the best and most comprehensive one, so I'll apply it universally (including for Deepnight Revelation) and ignore the rest…

p. 78 Tender Operations: "If both ships have an… UNREP" the High Guard page specifically says only one ship needs to have the UNREP.

p. 80 power: "A base requires power for general systems equal to 10% of its tonnage"
p. 81: "Power Requirements: A base requires points equal to 5% of its tonnage for general operations"

? is p.80 or p. 81 the right answer or is there a subtle distinction that needs to be made clearer?

<Start PWH commentary>
p. 81-88 those PWH values seem horrible inflated (rambling critique follows, leading sort of to a conclusion or suggestion). Are you telling me it takes 20 person-years to build a landing field? Or a 20 person team a full year? And a simple fuel tank even more? (oh, and the total on page 83 says "50,00" not 50,000 which actually speaks to what I think the values should be.)

As a real world example, the International Space Station has incurred 1416 hours in EVA through January 2020 for construction. Admittedly, that's for an enclosed volume of a little less than 1000 cubic meters, or about 70 displacement tons, but even that comes out to only 20 hours per ton. For something much more complex than building a fuel tank on the ground.

So, by the time we get to page 87, we have several person-centuries for this little tiny base (not a half century - see below).

Also, I really think you should charge the tunnel by the meter. They shouldn't grow more expensive when you make the backend bigger, after all, so the way to game it is to connect to a small module, then grown that module. If you use building rules instead, a 1.5m-wide tunnel would be 1 ton per 3m length, conversely, well, you get it.

And finally, this statement "454,000 Person-Work-Hours. A single person with hand tools could do it in 52 years" That assumes 24 hours a day for that person, who realistically would only work 2000 hours a year (or less if not in Japan or the US), and that’s a big part of the problem here… And did I miss the reference to a multiplier for not using just hand tools?

Or let's look at this another way using High Guard Rules. A starship takes one day per million credits to build at a yard. A 400 ton yard can build a 200 ton ship, in let's say 60 days (slightly fancy ship) and requires 40 crew to do so. So we get 40 X 60 X 8 (hours - if you assume 3 shifts, you also assume 3x workers and that's not the requirement, so from High Guard numbers it doesn't matter if it's one third the crew working in three shifts or the full crew working in one shift). Anyway 19,200 crew hours to build a 200 ton ship. 200 tons of just simple surface structure by these rules would require 300 X 200 = 60,000 crew hours, and that's just a building, no fancy drives or anything. So, at the very least divide by three to take into account that people don't-can't-won't work 24 hours a day. (Note that even 8 hours here is assuming 7 days a week or 56 hours a week, about as much useful work as you can squeeze out of someone long-term - so maybe divide by 4 to be reasonable for a full time equivalent).

What could be useful is a small table of multipliers for construction equipment and/or robots. Robots don't care about over-time, just maintenance time. Could be simple: a Cr 100,000 robot is worth X2 basic laborer, a 300,000 bot X 5 (yes, not cost-effective, but maybe smaller - make each robot probe drone or mining drone sized.)

Finally, "hours" is a level of detail not truly warranted with all these big numbers, use days instead, as that removes the working time consideration entirely - better yet weeks if you want to not deal with weekends/holidays/sick days (make it 50 weeks a year and the unions won't complain - US rules , not European, then you'd only get about 40 weeks).

Bottom line, if it were me, I'd take all the PWHs presented, divide by 40 and make it a PWD daily rate. Or divide by 200 and make it a PWW weekly rate. Take the pay rates, to start at Cr 80 per day, 400 per week, and pay double time for work requiring a vacc suit. Robots work for free but need to be maintained at least like a starship at 0.1% a month.
</End PWH commentary>

p. 95: "Information points" (two instances) makes more sense if it's "Information Points" or "information point", the former more clear since it's "Information Cost".

p. 96 Sindal Scholar chart: Maybe "Information Points" should be used on the table, or "Information total should be used on page 95. Also, what the scholar knows should be independent of the Traveller's skill. What they believe from what the scholar says is related to the skill.

p. 102 "of the , a large" insert trawler name here and in other missing places as has been mentioned by others. Also, as has been mentioned, the submarine should be "imaginatively named" or if not, call it "Sea God Hunter" or something ("Calamari Bait"?). Looking back at the original e-book for this it was "Marduk Lightfoot" for the trawler (didn't Gordon Lightfoot sing The Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald, nah, that can't be right…) and "Maris's Submarine" for the sub, though I really prefer "Calamari Bait". Not sure this adventure belongs in a story about pirates, though…

p. 123-132 The Cordan Conflict: just a general remark that since the population of the world is an admitted bogus number, a true number population would be useful in determining the size of forces (like perhaps 1% of the population max for regulars, maybe up to 5-30% for militia if it includes anybody that knows how to shoot a gun) and thus determining the size of the warring parties and the tactics the Travellers can reasonable use to influence the outcome. If we go with 100,000 people per barony, we get at most maybe a couple of battalions of decent troops and perhaps ten times as many militia, for instance.

p. 176 Pinnacle of Knowledge: misplaced from Chapter 19. Also, a few more of these would be fun, especially red herrings and deathtraps.

p. 177 The Specialist Collection Sindalian Empire: Despite the title, the equipment in here is mundane and current until page 180. I would suggest the construction equipment at least be moved to the construction section in Chapter 17.

p. 178. Offworld Construction Platform: 16 PWH ? would that be a per hour addition? Per Day? Certainly not one-time. Also, 2kg is unlikely to be the actual mass. Especially with a crew of 3-4, even 2 displacement tons would be too little unless that's the packed-up size and it unfolds like an accordion.

p. 184: Base Components: These would also probably work better if put in Chapter 17. I like this section. Finally rules for building my Volcano Lair!! I mean, my Fortified But Completely Legitimate Civilian Commercial Starport.

p. 184 Field Refueling Rig: for fueling processing, the small processing unit is half the cost of a starship fuel processors, but uses the same amount of power (?) and only processes a quarter as much. The only value I would see is if that power consumption increase is per day (not per round), so I would add "per day" to the phrase "This increases Power consumption by 1 point"

p. 185: Landing Area. The Cr 100 is a little contradictory with the Cr 500 per ton on Page 80 for "Surface work". But this Landing Area cost is more reasonable for a flat piece of regolith with some track lighting, so maybe it's just the level of very basic infrastructure. Does p. 80 give you a class D or above landing field?

p. 190 Rorix: Computer needs software. Additional Airlocks, well no matter how you interpret the rules on adding airlocks, you don't need three "Additional", since I only see 3 total.

p. 192 Rorix: Legend "Luxury Room", "High Staterooms" Standard Staterooms" no standard label for an accommodation. I would suggest, pick one, then manipulate the numbering so one column had all the long names so they all fit across the page in a decent font without needing to wrap.

p. 194 Cestion: As mentioned by others the design can only hold that weaponry if it’s a small lcraft, though that also drops the weapons range to close and adjacent. So that's the compromise you need to live with if you class it as a small craft and not a non-jump capable um, un-small craft. Otherwise, lose the pulse laser and you still have a killer design with a medium range barbette. And as Ursus Maior said, lose the astrogator. Replace him with a gunner - and add a captain is you want to match the description and the number of staterooms. And add some software for the computer or make it computer/5.

p. 196-7: Balleyn. I like. Only nits (yes, of course, sorry): It would be nice to delineate on the plans the difference between pure fuel tank and fuel/cargo containers; "4. STATE ROOMS" should be one word; since the second dual turret is actually a beam/sand turret, just calling both dual turrets would work fine; the illustration only shows single turrets; need a medic added to the crew; add software to the computer/20 or make it a computer /5 with jump control/1.

p. 198-201: Reach Freighter: Only see 3 airlocks, probably don't need to add any "additional" on a 4000 ton hull at all, unless you want some big cargo ones; No software; Not enough gunners; surprised it has zero small craft, not even a launch, "STATE ROOMS" one word; 11 should be BEAM LASER - and again 11/12 could just be "SINGLE TURRET".

p. 202-203 ECITS: Okay, this is complicated. The Gig description should spell out in text that its designed to carry a 100 ton module, or else the "small bridge" designation doesn't make sense; The ship is described as a Tug, but labeled as a Gig; if intended as a 150-ton craft, it needs an engineer; "STATE ROOMS" one word; "DOCKING CLAMPS" only one clamp.

p. 204-205: ECITS-6: state that its 900 tons for jump purposes in the text or table; no software listed, "STATE ROOM" (probably tired of that comment by now, but what can I say, I'm pedantic); add a medic- you've got a medical bay, so it's more than just regulation to have one; common area and cargo listed twice on table.

Design observation: This is a reasonable way to build a ship: hull and modules, but it goes against the grain of High Guard's modular hull design rules, which would be presented differently and have a different result for the base unit hull cost. Not saying it's wrong, just saying it’s an "undocumented" variance.

p. 206-209: Modules. High Guard again. 100 tons is way more than the 50 ton limit for a cockpit. You could go as low as 6 and call it a small bridge, but that's it. Ironically, it would be inside the rules to run the ship with no bridge, Virtual Crew/0, and either no pilot or a "remote" pilot sitting in a .5 ton acceleration seat - you just need TL 10 for virtual crew/0; no reason for the Torpedo module to have a cockpit, it has no drive; ascetic note on the table- if surrender a bit of space on the Cost column you could get "Common Area" to not take up two rows on the table.

p. 213: "scientificy work" ? funny, but not a word. Probably should be "scientific"

P. 214-217: Shouldn't faction size 0 be an asset? The math doesn't work for zero. If you want them as factions, make them size 1 like the table on page 15 implies. From reading the text, It may be the intent that they are Assets, but while the Raif write-up implies it, the "Type" should be Asset, not Individual. And if Andrea was a Faction, she should be a Faction Type "Economic/Industrial" of size 3, 4 or 5, the text on her status is muddy.

p.224 is a repeat of page 62. Maybe a faction worksheet was the intent?
Geir Lanesskog
Banded Mongoose
Posts: 203
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2018 11:52 am

Re: Drinaxian Compnaion

Postby MonkeyX » Sat Jul 04, 2020 9:41 pm

Page 185 basic refuelling rig
“Each bladder holds a maximum of 25 tons of fuel” there is no full stop her although “The rig...” does have a capital letter.
Banded Mongoose
Posts: 203
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2018 11:52 am

Re: Drinaxian Compnaion

Postby MonkeyX » Sat Jul 04, 2020 9:45 pm

Page 191 the Rorix
Staterooms: none of the stateroom types are capitalised.
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 1157
Joined: Mon May 29, 2006 9:33 am
Location: NZ

Re: Drinaxian Compnaion

Postby TrippyHippy » Sun Jul 05, 2020 10:55 pm

I’m just waiting till payday before pre-ordering this. Is it still right to say that I get the PDF for free when I do that?
User avatar
Site Admin
Posts: 14954
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2003 4:25 pm

Re: Drinaxian Compnaion

Postby MongooseMatt » Mon Jul 06, 2020 8:43 am

TrippyHippy wrote:
Sun Jul 05, 2020 10:55 pm
I’m just waiting till payday before pre-ordering this. Is it still right to say that I get the PDF for free when I do that?
It is indeed!
Matthew Sprange

Mongoose Publishing
User avatar
Ursus Maior
Posts: 140
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2019 11:36 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Drinaxian Compnaion

Postby Ursus Maior » Thu Jul 09, 2020 3:47 pm

I think so too. The book could use a bit moving around some pages and adding more bookmarks in the PDF, I think.

Back to errata:
  • Rorix Command Vessel, p. 191: The ship is missing entries on "Software" completely.
  • Cestion Strike Boat, p. 195. The ship is missing entries on "Software" completely. Also, the Cestion is marked as TL12, but (befittingly for a Sindalian warship) uses Thrust-9 and TL15 reactors. So the overall tech-level should be adjusted to TL15.
  • Balleyn Frontier Transport, p. 197. The ship is missing entries on "Software" completely. Additionally, the ship has a generous Computer/20, which seems excessive for a ship only capable of jump-1. While I encourage the use of jump synchronisation and some backup bandwidth, a model Computer/5bis up to a Computer/10bis should suffice. Or one could use a Computer/10bis and a backup Computer/5bis for maximum redundancy, while keeping all options and a lower price tag.
  • Reach Freighter, p. 199. The ship is missing entries on "Software" completely. Also, the ship has a generous Computer/15, which seems excessive for a as cheap as possible COTS configuration. I see the need for more bandwidth than jump-2 would need, namely to form convoys and synchronise jumps or run gunnery software, but a Computer/10bis should suffice.
  • ECITS Gig, p. 203. The ship is missing entries on "Software" completely.
  • ECITS 6-Module Prime Mover, p. 205. The ship is missing entries on "Software" completely.
  • ECITS modules, p. 207-214. All of the modules are missing their entries on "Software" completely.
Last edited by Ursus Maior on Fri Jul 24, 2020 7:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
liber et infractus
Posts: 89
Joined: Wed May 26, 2010 4:17 pm
Location: California, USA

Re: Drinaxian Compnaion

Postby Subzero001 » Fri Jul 17, 2020 1:13 am

I have a few of the books this incorporates in it, I will wait until all the error's and such get addressed. I maybe will wait for a special for pricing break and maybe shadow will be out by then. Will shadow have more of the history of the old Sindal empire of the past / maybe something of the Ancients in Trojan Reach and rift?
User avatar
Ursus Maior
Posts: 140
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2019 11:36 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Drinaxian Compnaion

Postby Ursus Maior » Fri Jul 24, 2020 7:36 am

MonkeyX wrote:
Thu Jul 02, 2020 9:55 pm
Should the base components section come after the base building rules? They seem a little out of place where they are.
I (we?) received an updated version of the PDF the other day. It's considerably bigger (about 1/4 or so) in megabytes, but I could not see any new texts, reshuffling of the existant texts or anything of that sort.

Can anyone comment on what the newer PDF constitutes or does better?
liber et infractus

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 131 guests