Traveller errata

Discuss the Traveller RPG and its many settings
Infojunky
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 2201
Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 10:19 pm
Location: North of Center California

Re: Traveller errata

Postby Infojunky » Wed Aug 27, 2014 12:26 am

sideranautae wrote:
History? If you go that route you will rewrite most of the rules to match earlier versions. That isn't what errata is about.

It is a WISHED for change in the MGT RAW. The game works just fine with out changing the existing rule.
Mostly I am saying there is room for interpretation, and sorting out questions like this is part of Errata-ing a document. And the ready missiles in turret is one of the oldest questions this forum.
Evyn
ShawnDriscoll
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 2839
Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2009 6:13 pm

Re: Traveller Core Rulebook errata

Postby ShawnDriscoll » Wed Aug 27, 2014 1:01 am

Sigtrygg wrote:My understanding is that errata has to be of one of three types:

typo fixing - something is mistyped in the CRB

rules correction - a problem has come to light with a particular rule, here is an official correction

rules update - usually found in supplements and adventures that overwrite CRB rules

Errata is not:

hey I think this rule sucks, mine is better

hey this rule breaks the laws of physics as discovered by CERN last tuesday, mine is more up to date and much better

hey I don;t think it should work like that, here is how it works in my home-brew houserules which are much better
Traveller errata is all about politics, and wanting to control how game rules are published.
phavoc
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 4620
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2008 6:13 pm

Re: Traveller errata

Postby phavoc » Wed Aug 27, 2014 5:20 am

sideranautae wrote:No. That isn't per MgT RAW. It is on a wish list.

Here is the rule in MGT: "Missile racks are launchers for small anti-ship missiles. The damage of a missile depends on the type of missile used. Missile racks need ammunition – twelve missiles take up one ton of space."

Missile racks in turrets hold no extra missiles in MGT.
That was the entire point of making the statement. Neither Core Rule book or High Guard address this question. You have missile rack, you have spare ammunition, and you have a question in between. Ergo it should be addressed so that the rules unequivocally answer the issue. Original Traveller missed it the first time around, too. One could a easily assume that people would just know since MGT Traveller is based off previous versions. But that assumption would obviously be incorrect. Plus, as it was stated elsewhere, when they wrote up the description for railguns they specifically addressed the on-mount ammunition question. So there's no reason why it should not be addressed for missiles, torpedoes, and sandcasters since they all fire ammo.
ShawnDriscoll wrote:Traveller errata is all about politics, and wanting to control how game rules are published.
Nah, that's not true at all. There are a lot of people who are passionate about the game though. Some of us have been with it since the beginning and through all the iterations and gyrations (even T5... shudder).
sideranautae
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 1412
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2014 8:28 pm

Re: Traveller errata

Postby sideranautae » Wed Aug 27, 2014 3:29 pm

phavoc wrote: Plus, as it was stated elsewhere, when they wrote up the description for railguns they specifically addressed the on-mount ammunition question. So there's no reason why it should not be addressed for missiles, torpedoes, and sandcasters since they all fire ammo.
Thank you. That's what I wanted to know. Other turret ammo references. If the railgun ammo was spec'ed as to volume it would be fairly easy to come up with a recommendation based on that.
Image
Nerhesi
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 1525
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2013 3:46 pm

Re: Traveller errata

Postby Nerhesi » Wed Aug 27, 2014 4:33 pm

Question - is a rail gun an energy weapon or not for the purposes of mounting it on a small craft?
l_c_jackson
Shrew
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2011 2:18 pm
Location: Godalming

Re: Traveller errata

Postby l_c_jackson » Sat Mar 26, 2016 5:49 pm

A bit late I admit, but ...

Trade codes, page 181, "Rich: Rich worlds are blessed with a stable government ..." but the criteria no longer include any range of values for government type.

It seems ironic to refer back to MegaTraveller in the context of errata, but for this trade code the MT Referee's Manual ("Basic Mainworld Generation 2", page 25) had government values of "4-9".

Which is incorrect in the Mongoose Traveller V1 Core Rulebook, the inclusion of "stable government" in the description, or the omission of any government values from the definition?

Thanks

Lindsay Jackson
Lindsay C Jackson
snrdg121408
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 1026
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2008 3:17 am
Location: Roy, WA USA

Re: Traveller errata

Postby snrdg121408 » Sun Mar 27, 2016 3:30 am

Hello l_c_jackson
l_c_jackson wrote:A bit late I admit, but ...

Trade codes, page 181, "Rich: Rich worlds are blessed with a stable government ..." but the criteria no longer include any range of values for government type.

It seems ironic to refer back to MegaTraveller in the context of errata, but for this trade code the MT Referee's Manual ("Basic Mainworld Generation 2", page 25) had government values of "4-9".

Which is incorrect in the Mongoose Traveller V1 Core Rulebook, the inclusion of "stable government" in the description, or the omission of any government values from the definition?

Thanks

Lindsay Jackson
My best guess is that the omission of any government values in the CRB 1e table is incorrect.

CRB 2e p. 228 Trade Codes
Rich: Blessed with a stable government and viable biosphere, making them economic powerhouses.

From the Trade Code Table
Rich: Code RI; Atmosphere 6,8; Population 6-8, Government 4-9
snrdg121408 (aka Tom R)
l_c_jackson
Shrew
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2011 2:18 pm
Location: Godalming

Re: Traveller errata

Postby l_c_jackson » Sun Mar 27, 2016 7:15 pm

Apologies, another very late suggestion for the Traveller Core Rulebook V1. On page 149 the paragraph headed "Fire Sand" says "Turrets equipped with sandcasters can fire sand at incoming beam attacks." It is not clear what is meant by "beam attacks" in this context.

Assuming(!) that things have not changed since Classic Traveller High Guard (page 45), sand works against missiles (as covered elsewhere in the Mongoose core rulebook), lasers (both "Pulse" and "Beam"), and "Fusion Gun" (Classic plasma guns are not listed here as a ship-to-ship weapon). Sand does not work against "Particle Beam", despite the name including the word "beam".

So, it would be better if the above sentence read instead: "Turrets equipped with sandcasters can fire sand at incoming laser and fusion attacks (particle beams and meson guns are unaffected by sand)."

Just to confuse things further, Mongoose High Guard page 74 says "Sand protects against incoming laser attacks and missile attacks", no mention of fusion guns. I don't know whether that inconsistency with Classic High Guard is an error, or not.

Kind regards

Lindsay Jackson
Lindsay C Jackson
snrdg121408
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 1026
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2008 3:17 am
Location: Roy, WA USA

Re: Traveller errata

Postby snrdg121408 » Tue Apr 05, 2016 8:57 pm

Hello all,

Here is material from HG 1e Softcover and PDF Capital Ship Design Rules and the Capital Ship Design Example pp. 69-72 and Traveller HG 1e Errata that I believe that is incorrect based on the rules as I understand them. Hopefully I am not as has been mentioned creating "fan fiction". Note: The softcover HG 1e in my collection is the printing with the Mercenary Table of Contents, which is the material below references HG 1e PDF.

1. HG 1e PDF Page 70
In Step 2, the Power Plant tons equation in the text should be (0.05 x 0.75 x 75,000) 2,812. 5 tons versus (0.05 x 0.75 x 7,500) 2,812.5 tons

Proof:
(0.05 x 0.75 x 7,500) = (0.0375 x 7,500) 281.25 tons
(0.05 x 0.75 x 75,000) = (0.0375 x 75,000) 2,812.5 tons

2. HG 1e PDF Page 70
In Step 2, the TL 15 Power Plant cost in the text and Summary So Far table should be MCr14,062.5 versus MCr7,031.25

Proof:
HG 1e PDF p. 63 Power Plant Cost per ton is as follows:

Chemical power plants MCr 1.25
Fission power plants MCr 1
TL8–10 Fusion MCr 2
TL11–14 Fusion MCr 2.5
TL15 Fusion MCr 5
Antimatter plants MCr 2.5

(2,812.5 x MCr5) MCr14,062.5

3. HG 1e PDF Page 70
In Step 2, the Summary So Far Table Running Total cost should be MCr42,211.25 versus MCr35,180 due to the corrected cost of the TL 15 Power Plant price.

Proof: 19,250 + 7,500 + 1,218.75 + 14,062.5 + 180 = 26,750 + 1,218.75 + 14,062.5 + 180 = 27,968.75 + 14,062.5 + 180 = 42,031.25 + 180 = MCr42,211.25

4. HG 1e PDF Page 70
In Step 3, the equation for the fuel processor tons in the text should be (33,750 / 20 / 2) 843.75 versus (37,500 / 20 / 2) 843.75 and the cost of MCr42.1875 is correct.

Proof:
Jump Fuel (0.4 x 75,000) 30,000 tons
Power Plant Fuel (2,812.5 x 2/3 x 2) = (1,875 x 2) = 3,750 tons
Jump Fuel 30,000 tons + Power Plant Fuel 3,750 tons = 33,750 tons
Fuel Processor tons = (33,750 / 20 / 2) = (1,687.5 / 2) = 843.75 tons.
Fuel Processor price = (843.75 x MCr0.05 per ton of fuel processor) = MCr42.1875

5. Delete the Traveller HG 1e Errata change for calculating the fuel processor tonnage and cost which is using the incorrect total fuel tonnage of 37,500 tons versus 33,750 tons.

6. HG 1e PDF Page 70
In Step 3, the Summary So Far Table Running Total for tonnage is correct and the cost should be MCr42,254.4375 versus MCr35,223.1875 due to the corrected cost of the TL 15 Power Plant price in Step 2.

Proof:
From Step 2: MCr42,211.25 + Fuel Scoops MCr1.000 + Fuel Processor MCr42.1875 = 42,212.25 + 42.1875 = MCr42,254.4375

7. HG 1e PDF Page 70
In Step 4 the text for the bridge cost modifier should be MCr0.1 versus MCr1 and the Traveller HG 1e Errata entry of "the bridge should cost MCr150 (the table is correct)" should be used.

Proof:
HG 1e PDF p. 63 Capital Ship Section Table: A 75,000 ton hull has a Hull Code of CK the number of section for a hull code of CK is 4.
HG 1e PDF p. 65 Command Module/Bridge Tonnage: Number of sections x 0.5 x Ship's total tonnage
HG 1e PDF p. 65 Command Module/Bridge Cost: Command module/bridge tonnage x MCr.1
The HG PDF 1e PDF Capital Ship Design Command Module/Bridge text p. 63 MCr multiplier could either be MCr1 as shown or MCr0.1. By using the Traveller HG 1e Errata entry that the bridge cost is MCr150 the command module/bridge MCr multiplier can be determined by manipulating the cost equation with the bridge tonnage and the cost of MCr150 per the Traveller HG 1e Errata entry.

Command Module/Bridge 1,500 tons x MCr? = MCr150 = MCr? = MCr150 / 1,500 tons = MCr0.1.

8. HG 1e PDF Page 70
In Step 4, the command bridge cost should be MCr48 versus MCr2,250 in the text and in the Summary So Far Table

Proof:
HG 1e PDF p. 44: A command bridge costs 50% more than a conventional bridge of the same size. Capital ship command bridges take up 80 tons per section of ship and located in a single location (which may be separate from the main bridge).
HG 1e PDF p. 63 Capital Ship Section Table: A 75,000 ton hull has a Hull Code of CK the number of section for a hull code of CK is 4.

Command Bridge tonnage = 80 tons x 4 sections = 320 tons.
Command Bridge Cost: Per the rules the cost of a command bridge is 50% more than the cost of a conventional (command module/) bridge of the same size. A 320 ton conventional (command module/) bridge cost is 320 tons x MCr0.1 = MCr32.
The command bridge cost is 50% more than a 320 ton conventional (command module/) bridge of MCr32 which would be MCr32 + (MCr32 x 0.5) = MCr32 + MCr16 = Command Bridge Price of MCr48.

9. HG 1e PDF Page 70
In Step 4 the holographic control cost should be MCr49.5 versus 937.5 in the text and in the Summary So Far Table

Proof:
HG 1e PDF p. 46: Holographic Controls: This bridge design incorporates advanced interactive holographic displays, reconfiguring itself to adapt to the current situation. A bridge with holographic controls is always optimised, and gives a +2 bonus when rolling for Initiative. A holographic bridge adds 25% to the cost of the bridge.

Command Module/(Conventional) Bridge Holographic Control Cost 0.25 x 150 = MCr37.5
Command Bridge Holographic Control Cost 0.25 x 48 = MCr12

Total Holographic Control MCr = MCr37.5 + MCr12 = MCr49.5

10. HG 1e PDF Page 70
In Step 4, in the Summary So Far Table Running Total Cost should be MCr42,538.3375 versus MCr39,947.0875.

Proof:
From Step 3 MCr42,254.4375 + Bridge MCr150 + Command Bridge MCr48 + Holographic Controls MCr49.5 + Armored Bulkheads MC36.4 = MCr42,404.4375 + MCr48 + MCr49.5 + MC36.4 = MCr42,452.4375 + MCr49.5 + MC36.4 = MCr42,501.9375 + MCr36.4 = MCr42,538.3375.

11. HG 1e PDF p. 71
In Step 5, change the Summary So Far Total Cost to MCr42,925.3375 versus MCr40,334.0875.

Proof:
From Step 4 MCr42,538.3375 + Computer MCr315 + Software MC72 = MCr42,853.3375 + MC72 = MCr42,925.3375.

12. HG 1e PDF p. 71
In Step 6, change the Summary So Far Total Cost to MCr43,222.375 versus MCr40,631.0875.

Proof:
From Step 5 MCr42,925.3375 + Sensor MC297 = MCr43,222.3375.

13. HG 1e PDF Page 71
In Step 7 the Summary So Far Table Cost of Small Craft should be MCr152 versus MCr112.

Proof:
HG 1e PDF p. 71 Step 7 Other Components:
Full Scale Hangars for 4 cutters and 2 pinnaces (4 x 50 x 1.3 + 2 x 40 x 1.3) totalling 364 tons and costing (364 x 0.2) MCr72.8.
Small craft costs are MCr152 and require a total of 18 crew.

CRB 1e p. 111 Vehicles and Drones Table:
A single 50 ton cutter costs MCr28 and the price of single 40 pinnace is MCr20.
Total small craft cost = (4 cutters x MCr28) + (2 pinnaces x MCr20) = 4 cutters MCr112 + 2 pinnaces MCr40 = MCr152.

14. HG 1e PDF p. 71
In Step 7, change the Summary So Far Total Cost to MCr43,600.6375 versus MCr41,009.3875.

Proof:
From Step 6 MCr43,222.3375 + Luxuries MCr1 + Probe Drones MCr0.5 + Repair Drones MCr150 + Briefing Rooms MCr2 + Cutter Hangars MCr52 + Pinnace Hangars MCr20.6 + Cost of Small Craft MC152 = MCr43,223.375 + MCr0.5 + MCr150 +MCr2 + MCr52 + MCr20.6 + MC152 = MCr43,223.8375 + MCr150 +MCr2 + MCr52 + MCr20.6 + MC152 = MCr43,373.8375 +MCr2 + MCr52 + MCr20.6 + MC152 = MCr43,375.8375 + MCr52 + MCr20.6 + MC152 = MCr43,427.8375 + MCr20.6 + MC152 = MCr43,448.4375 + MC152 = MCr43600.4375.

15.Traveller HG 1e Errata
Change the 2,880 torpedoes = MCr14.4 to 2,880 basic torpedoes = MCr14.4.

Proof:
Traveller HG 1e Errata corrected Torpedo Types Table: Cost per Torpedo
2,880 Basic Torpedoes x MCr0.005 = MCr14.4
2,880 Nuclear Torpedoes x MCr0.015 = MCr43.2
2,880 Bomb-Pumper Laser Torpedoes x MCr0.018 = MCr51.84
2,880 Ortillery Torpedoes x MCr0.012 = MCr34.56

16.Traveller HG 1e Errata
Change the 6,000 missile MCr90 to 6,000 basic missile MCr7.5

Proof:
CRB 1e p. 111 Missiles Table
Cost per 12 missiles (Cr.) the costs below are converted to MCr.
(6,000 basic missiles / 12) x MCr0.015 = 500 x MCr0.015 = MCr7.5
(6,000 smart missiles / 12) x MCr0.03 = 500 x MCr0.03 = MCr15
(6,000 nuclear missiles / 12) x MCr0.045 = 500 x MCr0.045 = MCr22.5

Traveller HG 1e Errata corrected Missiles Types Table: Cost per 12 missiles (Cr) the costs below are converted to MCr.
(6,000 Shockwave missiles / 12) x MCr0.035 = 500 x MCr0.035 = MCr17.5
(6,000 Ortillery missiles / 12) x MCr0.035 = 500 x MCr0.025 = MCr12.5

17. HG 1e PDF p. 72
In Step 8, add the following costs to the text and Summary So Far Table per the Traveller HG 1e Errata;

2,880 Torpedoes = MCr14.4
6,000 Missiles = MCr7.5
12,000 Sandcaster Barrels = MCr6

18. HG 1e PDF pp. 71-72
In Step 8, change the text and Summary So Far table entry of triple particle beam turrets to beam turrets.

Proof:
Traveller HG 1e errata for HG 1e PDF Page 47:
Under Changes to Core Rule Book, add:
Only one particle beam may be fitted to a turret, but this turret must be a triple beam turret.

19. HG 1e PDF pp. 71-72
In Step 8, change the text and Summary So Far table cost entry from MCr2,000 to MCr720.

Proof:
Traveller HG 1e errata for HG 1e PDF Page 47:
Under Changes to Core Rule Book, add:
Only one particle beam may be fitted to a turret, but this turret must be a triple beam turret.

CRB 1e p. 111: Triple turret cost MCr1 x 80 turrets = MCr80
CRB 1e p. 111: Particle Beam MCr 4 x 80 single particle beam weapons = MCr320
HG 1e PDF p. 71 Particle Beam Weapon is TL 11.
HG 1e PDF p. 53 Particle beams are available at TL 8 and the design example has upgraded them to TL 11 which doubles the cost per the Armaments and Screens Table.

80 particle beam turret MCr = Turrets MCr80 + (Particle Beam MCr320 x TL Cost Mod 2) = MCr80 + MCr640 = MCr720

20. HG 1e PDF pp. 71-72
In Step 8, add the following costs to the text and Summary So Far Table per the Traveller HG 1e Errata;

2,880 Torpedoes = MCr14.4
6,000 Missiles = MCr7.5
12,000 Sandcaster Barrels = MCr6

21. HG 1e PDF p. 72
In Step 8, change the Summary So Far Total Cost to MCr56,473.6575 versus MCr55,134.5075.

Proof:
From Step 7
MCr43,600.375 + MCr4,000 + MCr80 + MCr2,000 +MCr1,920 + MCr69.8 + MCr720 + MC1,680 + MCr325 + MCr350 + MCr12.4 +MCr14.4 + MCr7.5 + MCr6 + MCr600 + MCr1,080 + MCr7.92 =

MCr47,600.6375 + MCr80 + MCr2,000 +MCr1,920 + MCr69.8 + MCr720 + MC1,680 + MCr325 + MCr350 + MCr12.4 +MCr14.4 + MCr7.5 + MCr6 + MCr600 + MCr1,080 + MCr7.92 =

MCr47680.6375 + MCr2,000 +MCr1,920 + MCr69.8 + MCr720 + MC1,680 + MCr325 + MCr350 + MCr12.4 +MCr14.4 + MCr7.5 + MCr6 + MCr600 + MCr1,080 + MCr7.92 =

MCr49,680.6375 +MCr1,920 + MCr69.8 + MCr720 + MC1,680 + MCr325 + MCr350 + MCr12.4 +MCr14.4 + MCr7.5 + MCr6 + MCr600 + MCr1,080 + MCr7.92 =

MCr51,600.6375 + MCr69.8 + MCr720 + MC1,680 + MCr325 + MCr350 + MCr12.4 +MCr14.4 + MCr7.5 + MCr6 + MCr600 + MCr1,080 + MCr7.92 =

MCr51,670.4375 + MCr720 + MC1,680 + MCr325 + MCr350 + MCr12.4 +MCr14.4 + MCr7.5 + MCr6 + MCr600 + MCr1,080 + MCr7.92 =

MCr52,390.4375 + MC1,680 + MCr325 + MCr350 + MCr12.4 +MCr14.4 + MCr7.5 + MCr6 + MCr600 + MCr1,080 + MCr7.92 =

MCr54,070.4375 + MCr325 + MCr350 + MCr12.4 +MCr14.4 + MCr7.5 + MCr6 + MCr600 + MCr1,080 + MCr7.92 =

MCr54,395.4375 + MCr350 + MCr12.4 +MCr14.4 + MCr7.5 + MCr6 + MCr600 + MCr1,080 + MCr7.92 =

MCr54,745.4375 + MCr12.4 +MCr14.4 + MCr7.5 + MCr6 + MCr600 + MCr1,080 + MCr7.92 =

MCr54,757.8375 +MCr14.4 + MCr7.5 + MCr6 + MCr600 + MCr1,080 + MCr7.92 =

MCr54,772.2375 + MCr7.5 + MCr6 + MCr600 + MCr1,080 + MCr7.92 =

MCr54,779.7375 + MCr6 + MCr600 + MCr1,080 + MCr7.92 =

MCr54,785.7375 + MCr600 + MCr1,080 + MCr7.92 =

MCr55,385.7375 + MCr1,080 + MCr7.92 =

MCr56,465.7375 + MCr7.92 = MCr56,473.6575

22. HG 1e PDF p. 72
In Step 10, change the Summary So Far Total Cost to MCr56,874.8575 versus MCr55,535.7075.

Proof:
From Step 8 MCr56,473.6575 + Armories MCr22 + Staterooms MCr316 + Escape Pod MC63.2 =
MCr56,495.6575 + Staterooms MCr316 + Escape Pod MC63.2 =
MCr56,811.6575+ Escape Pod MC63.2 = MCr56,874.8575 with ammunition

MCr56,846.96 without ammunition

Standard Design: MCr56,846.96 without ammunition - (.1 x MCr56,846.96) =
MCr56,846.96 without ammunition - MCr56,84.696 = MCr51,162.2618

I am still trying to determine the maintenance cost, unfortunately I am not sure which of the three calculated total costs to use:
MCr56,874.8575 with ammunition
MCr56,846.96 without ammunition
Discount for standard design: MCr51,162.2618 without ammunition
snrdg121408 (aka Tom R)
l_c_jackson
Shrew
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2011 2:18 pm
Location: Godalming

Re: Traveller errata

Postby l_c_jackson » Wed Apr 06, 2016 12:35 pm

l_c_jackson wrote:Apologies, another very late suggestion for the Traveller Core Rulebook V1. On page 149 the paragraph headed "Fire Sand" says "Turrets equipped with sandcasters can fire sand at incoming beam attacks." It is not clear what is meant by "beam attacks" in this context.

Assuming(!) that things have not changed since Classic Traveller High Guard (page 45), sand works against missiles (as covered elsewhere in the Mongoose core rulebook), lasers (both "Pulse" and "Beam"), and "Fusion Gun" (Classic plasma guns are not listed here as a ship-to-ship weapon). Sand does not work against "Particle Beam", despite the name including the word "beam".

So, it would be better if the above sentence read instead: "Turrets equipped with sandcasters can fire sand at incoming laser and fusion attacks (particle beams and meson guns are unaffected by sand)."

Just to confuse things further, Mongoose High Guard page 74 says "Sand protects against incoming laser attacks and missile attacks", no mention of fusion guns. I don't know whether that inconsistency with Classic High Guard is an error, or not.

Kind regards

Lindsay Jackson
Sorry, I was wrong. The Core Rulebook ship design rules (page 111) clearly state that sandcasters "counteract the strength of lasers". There is no mention of fusion guns (nor of any other weapon)s being defeated by sand. This change from classic Highguard appears to be deliberate.
Lindsay C Jackson
snrdg121408
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 1026
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2008 3:17 am
Location: Roy, WA USA

Re: Traveller errata

Postby snrdg121408 » Wed Apr 06, 2016 9:03 pm

Hello donm61873 and msprange,

The link on the first Traveller errata post of http://dmckinne.winterwar.org/pdfs/Cons ... Errata.pdf. is reporting that the page can't be found. I'm hoping that the material has been moved and will be accessible again.
snrdg121408 (aka Tom R)
peelseel2
Weasel
Posts: 34
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 5:49 pm

Re: Traveller errata

Postby peelseel2 » Tue Mar 26, 2019 8:56 pm

Any chance of getting a copy of the 1st edition errata?
Last edited by peelseel2 on Tue Mar 26, 2019 8:58 pm, edited 2 times in total.
donm61873
Stoat
Posts: 91
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2004 10:40 pm
Location: Saint Joseph, IL

Re: Traveller errata

Postby donm61873 » Wed Mar 27, 2019 3:44 am

peelseel2,
DonM61873 passed away on 12/11/15. I'm his widow. His errata is available on DriveThruRPG at https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/12 ... ation-Pack. I didn't know if anyone else would answer you.

SusanM
Zhodani author and FFE minion
HalC
Mongoose
Posts: 132
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 3:42 pm

Re: Traveller errata

Postby HalC » Wed Mar 27, 2019 4:29 am

donm61873 wrote:
Wed Mar 27, 2019 3:44 am
peelseel2,
DonM61873 passed away on 12/11/15. I'm his widow. His errata is available on DriveThruRPG at https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/12 ... ation-Pack. I didn't know if anyone else would answer you.

SusanM
Ma'am - thank you for your Kindness. It is VERY much appreciated.

Hal

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests