World Builder's Handbook Feedback

[Geir]

For the Glossary, would it be possible to include page numbers for terms? It doesn't matter that much in digital formats, but thumbing through physical books can be more challenging.

Wouldn't that make it more like an index? I can't see how it's practical for terms mentioned numerous times. AU would probably be a page full of page references.

 

[Shardan13]

Found some equations with missing brackets.

pg 110 Albedo Table
Various equations where a term in the format 2d+n*c where n is the modifier of the dice roll. It should read (2d+n)*c.

Someone should check the rest of the equations for this error.

 

[MongooseBella]

For reference, all the comments I have liked are being sent to layout. Other ones I'm querying with @Geir! Thank you all for sending these in

 

[Seffix]

Wouldn't that make it more like an index? I can't see how it's practical for terms mentioned numerous times. AU would probably be a page full of page references.

It would make it more like an index, but the Index didn't have an entry for HZCO (I could have used the search function in the browser, but I'm in the 'aforementioned target demographic,' so I'm strategizing for the physical book...). But I don't want to force the page count to go up, and yeah... Anyhow, it's great!

 

[Geir]

Found some equations with missing brackets.

pg 110 Albedo Table
Various equations where a term in the format 2d+n*c where n is the modifier of the dice roll. It should read (2d+n)*c.

Someone should check the rest of the equations for this error.

Yes. That's my fault - it looked clear with wider spacing on Word, but I can see where the issue is. All 2d+n should be in parenthesized . Or more clearly all 2D + or - n should be. As in:

 

[flyteach]

On page 149: a Population code of 6 implies 1,000,000 9,999,999,999 people.

This should be a Population code of 6 implies 1,000,000 9,999,999 people.

I certainly hope these errata will be fixed for the printed version. Is there a date where it will be locked for printing?
Jim/Flyteach

 

[MongooseBella]

On page 149: a Population code of 6 implies 1,000,000 9,999,999,999 people.

This should be a Population code of 6 implies 1,000,000 9,999,999 people.

I certainly hope these errata will be fixed for the printed version. Is there a date where it will be locked for printing?
Jim/Flyteach

They will be I think we left Trailing about a week or two before it was sent...

 

[Geir]

On page 17, in the right column, in the paragraph beginning "The major determinant for..."
the second sentence says: "Actual temperature values can be extrapolated from the table above..."

Remove the word 'above' from the above.

Also I just noticed that on the example in the second column p. 17 there is
'A roll of 9–7 results in a +2 out of a possible range of 5' There should be a ± symbol in front of the 5
and
'so 5,440 40' There should be a ± symbol in front of the 40

I definitely outsmarted myself on using the equation editor's ± symbol instead of inserting it directly as a word symbol, since that didn't survive a trip out of Word.

 

[Geir]

For page 38, change the formula and DMs from:


to

 

[Sigtrygg]

They will be I think we left Trailing about a week or two before it was sent...

I understand the need to ship product - but I think I speak for the many when I say I would rather spend an extra month error checking the pdf before it goes to print so the print product is as error free as the collective can make it.

Which is why I keep banging on about you releasing the final pdf to a volunteer group of forumites. An editor may not pick up on many of these errors for perhaps one or more of these several reasons:
they don's know the game system well enough
they don't understand the maths/formulae well enough
they don't know the setting well enough

 

[Geir]

Table page 40, change to:

 

[Epabaa]

Congratulations on a truly impressive accomplishment. Very glad to have this in my hands. A couple questions: First, any possibility of releasing a form pack for the IISS survey forms on a white background for ease of printing and use? Second, I love the economic extension material--am I right to think that it is derived and updated from T4 Pocket Empires and if so, is there any thought of a supplement/JTAS article or some such that would similarly revise and update the Pocket Empires domain-level management and campaign system? That would be amazing. Thanks for creating such a wonderful addition to the MgT2e canon!

 

[Geir]

Congratulations on a truly impressive accomplishment. Very glad to have this in my hands. A couple questions: First, any possibility of releasing a form pack for the IISS survey forms on a white background for ease of printing and use? Second, I love the economic extension material--am I right to think that it is derived and updated from T4 Pocket Empires and if so, is there any thought of a supplement/JTAS article or some such that would similarly revise and update the Pocket Empires domain-level management and campaign system? That would be amazing. Thanks for creating such a wonderful addition to the MgT2e canon!

Thank you!
I'll have to defer to Mongoose management on the forms question, though I was hoping for at least fillable PDF forms and a forms sheet pack (digital or physical or both) would be a great idea as well.

As for the economic extensions they start with material are taken from T5, which I suppose might have been T4-based - I'd have to go back and look. Then I added some stuff from Trillion credit squadron (the MgT1 version) and GURPS Traveller's Far Trader WTN codes and finished it off with some real-world-ish stuff for the equality and development numbers. And then tariffs. Far Trader tried to go down what looked like an income tax route with taxes, and I can't see how that's workable in Traveller (Can I right off the hull damage I got while fleeing the revenue cutter? With a really good accountant maybe I could, but adventures in accounting don't make for interesting adventures) and so just worked taxation in as tariffs on imports.

 

[GabrielGABFonseca]

Took me five days, but I've just finished reading the whole book front-to-back! You've done an outstanding job Mr. Lanesskog, that much is beyond doubt.
There are some things I would personally have approached differently, but they're beyond the scope of this thread and more appropriate for conversation over beers (which in the unlikely circumstance of us ever meeting, I feel is my duty to provide you with one).

Anyway, here's everything I've noted while going through the book, starting with typos and (potential) mistakes. Some of these might have been reported already, but I'll list all of them here both for completeness and as I haven't been keeping tabs with the thread (I was busy reading )

(Obs.: If I'm not fully sure something is or isn't a mistake, it'll have a [?] beside it)

• Page 3, third paragraph, second indent: '(...) with data on Travellermap.com for the entire system to show (...)' the 'for' is stricken through.
• Page 5, 'Expanded Hex Code': '(...) numbers from 10–15 as A–F. To represent additional numbers (...)' should read 'numbers from 10–15 as A–F to represent additional numbers', as it is still the same sentence.
• Page 16, 'Peculiar Star Types', first paragraph [?]: 'A result of 2 in the Peculiar column requires more work on the part of the Referee.' should instead read 'A result of 2 in the Unusual column requires more work on the part of the Referee.' as that's what would lead the Referee to deal with the Peculiar Star Types themselves on a roll of two, surely?
• Page 16, 'Peculiar Star Types', sixth paragraph: 'hypothetical exotic stars (quark, strange,electroweak, dark matter,and so on)' missing a space between 'dark matter,' and 'and so on'.
• Page 17, 'Unusual and Peculiar Object Mass' header: A rather 'paculiar' well of spelling peculiar.
• Page 20, 'Main Sequence Lifespan', third paragraph: 'Referee can modify these assumptions as they see fit.' should read 'The Referee can (...)'
• Page 26, 'Fractional Orbit#s', second paragraph: 'Any Orbit#, can have add an extra D10 ÷ 100 to the result to provide a two digit fractional value.' has an extra comma between 'Any Orbit#' and 'can have'.
• Page 26, 'Fractional Orbit# Conversion to AU', second paragraph: 'To determine the orbital distance in kilometres, multiple by 150 million or by the more precise AU to kilometre value (...)' should read 'multiply by 150 million (...)', not multiple.
• Page 29, 'Stellar Classes and Types for Multi-Star Systems', 'Lesser': 'The lesser of a M-type star another M-type star, but (...)' is missing an 'is' between 'The lesser of a M-Type star' and 'another M-Type star'.
• Page 30, second paragraph: '(...) the companion is 8:sibling; a further 1D roll (...)' missing a space between '8:' and 'sibling'.
• Page 31, 'IISS Procedural', second paragraph: '(...) as they age they emit less heat, becoming undisguisable from large gas giants (...)' should be 'indistinguishable' instead of 'undisguisable' (this word does in actuality exist, but means 'impossible to disguise', whereas the context here is about the ability to distinguish the object from gas giants).
• Page 34, 'IISS Class 0/I Survery', 'Sector | Location' entry: missing a space between 'Storr' and the vertical slash '|'.
• Page 42, last paragraph: 'Convert the above AU values into Orbit#s results in the following:' should read 'Converting the above AU (...)'.
• Page 43, 'Habitable Zone Breadth', last paragraph: '(...) for use in the Step 3d when placing of existing mainworlds in the following section.' has an extra 'of' between 'when placing' and 'existing mainworlds'.
• Page 50, 'Anomalous Planets', first paragraph: 'The planet occupying this orbit may be a captured body, or a just world in an
  unusual orbit, (...)' while the world might very well be just, I suspect this should read 'or just a world' instead.
• Page 52, fifth paragraph: 'The random orbit from the anomalous world has been inserted in the primary and companion stars’ Aab Orbit sequence as ‘A1’ to give (...)' surely the random orbit was inserted as 'A+' on the table, not 'A1'?
• Page 55, 'Quantity of Significant Moons' DM table: 'Planet is in the adjacent to the outermost Orbit#range of a Close, Near or Far star' surely there is either an 'orbit' or 'orbital slot' missing between 'the adjacent' and 'to the outermost'?
• Page 57, 'Significant Moon Size', third paragraph: 'For a gas giant, a roll of 6 indicates a larger moon and requires a 1D roll on the Gas Giant Special Sizing table, followed by a final roll for Size.' should read '(...) a 1D roll on the Gas Giant Special Moon Sizing table, followed (...)'.
• Page 58, 'Default Moon Designations', second paragraph: 'Insignificant moons are often not initially discovered and occasional transitory.' should read '(...) discovered and occasionally transitory'.
• Page 59, 'Mainworld Candidate', sixth paragraph: 'Planet B II is a possible being 0.08 Orbit#s colder (...)' missing the word candidate between 'possible' and 'being'.
• Page 62, 'Corella', third paragraph: '(...) the rest of the worlds are placed, gas giant followed by planetoid belts (...)' should be gas giants, plural.
• Page 66, 'Corella System Overview': The planets' numbering in the diagram does not match the one given on the form on page 65.
• Page 73, Belt Bulk, first paragraph [?]: 'Subsequent collisions cause more small bodies and the trend continues.' while technically not wrong, I think this should either be changed to '(...) collisions create more small bodies (...)' or explicitly state '(...) cause more small bodies to form (...)'.
• Page 75, 'Moon Orbit Limits,' first paragraph: 'The latter is a universal fixed scale he placement of moon orbits around planets of varying sizes.' ... I think it should read '(...) a universal fixed scale for the placement (...)', but currently this sentence just ain't right.
• Page 75, 'Moon Orbit Limits', fourth paragraph: 'The result of this equation is the approximate Hill sphere radius of the planet in expressed in AU.' has an extra 'in' between 'the planet' and 'expressed in AU'.
• Page 76, 'Moon Orbit Deterioration', second paragraph: 'Next, determine the orbit each of the planet’s moons (...)' missing an 'of' or maybe a 'for' between 'determine the orbit' and 'each of the planet's moons'.
• Page 87, 'Atmospheric Gas Composition Table', asterisk: '(...) but at temperatures above 900K CO will be more dominate that CH in most atmospheres.' should read '(...) more dominant than (...)'.
• Page 88, 'Exotic Atmosphere Profile', second paragraph: 'The retention value would need to 0.75 or 0.86, to retain oxygen or nitrogen, respectively, and higher still to retain water.' is missing a 'be' between 'would need to' and '0.75 or 0.86'.
• Page 90, 'Corrosive and Insidious Atmosphere Profile', last paragraph: 'Next, determine the gas max that makes this world corrosive' should read 'gas mix', not 'max'.
• Page 111, 'Optional Runaway Greenhouse Check', first paragraph: page reference points to this very page.
• Page 111, 'Optional Runaway Greenhouse Check', second paragraph: missing period between '(...) Zed Aa and Ab' and 'Those two stars (...)'.
• Page 116, 'Case 1: Tropical Zone', first paragraph: '(from axial tilt, although a large eccentricity could provide a season-like effects)' delete the 'a' between 'could provide' and 'season-like effects'.
• Page 119, 'How Bright Is That Thing In The Sky?': 'This brightness is usually expressed terms of apparent magnitude.' missing an 'in' between 'expressed' and 'terms'.
• Page 124, third paragraph: 'This example is purely based on the orbit of Aab
IV, Zed Prime’s gas giant primary and ignores and seasonal axial tilt variation'
• Page 125, 'Gas Giant Residual Heat', last paragraph: 'Adding these te mperatures yields an e ective temperature of 256K.' extra space present.
• Page 130, 'Extinct Native Sophont Existed', DM Table: 'f system age is greater than 5 Gyrs' the 'if' is missing an i.
• Page 132, Second Footnote: footnote is cut off and incomplete.
• Page 149, 'Additional Significant Digits': 'a Population code of 6 implies 1,000,000 – 9,999,999,999 people.' there are three more nines than there should be.
• Page 149, 'Additional Significant Digits': 'A Population code 6 world with a P value of 9 and a subsequent D10 roll of 9 would have 9,900,000 people, but its P value would still be 6.' should end with 'but its Population code would still be 6.', not 'P value'.
• Page 152, third paragraph: the example issues a DM to the urbanization roll based on the planet's habitability rating, but this is not mentioned as a DM on the table in the previous page.
• Page 153, 'Major City Population', Case 3: 'If the result is less than 100 people, then the largest city population becomes larger of the world’s total urban population divided by 10 or just 1D+1 people.' surely "becomes the larger of"?
• Page 165, 'Weapons and Armour' [?]: 'The Central Supply Catalogue provides additional guidance on permitting and restrictions of categories of weaponry,' surely this should be something like 'guidance on permissions and restrictions of categories of weaponry'?
• Page 170, second paragraph: '(...) an immediate and permanent expulsion from world,' missing either an 'a' or 'the' between 'expulsion from' and 'world'.
• Page 176, 'Non-starport hosting nation Low Common TL': surely there should also be a TLM roll as well as the DMs?
• Page 185, third paragraph: '(...) its leadership held at bay increasingly harsh measures.' missing either a 'by' or 'through'.
• Page 188, 'Gross World Product', first paragraph: 'For balkanised worlds, this value can be computed for each nation or faction for the world as a whole.' missing 'or' between 'or faction' and 'for the world'.
• Page 195, third paragraph: '(...) supporting the footprint of a starship of at least 400 tons.' suggest changing to 'a starship of at least up to 400 tons' or equivalent.
• Page 199, seventh paragraph: 'As they only produce small craft, their shipyard output is always equal to 10 times their shipyard capacity.' should probably specify that it refers to 'their shipyard build capacity'.
• Page 211: Misplaced ':' between Total and Urbanisation% boxes.
• Page 214: Missing 'PCR' block and figure.
• Page 221, 'Detection': '(...) a sensor operator or astronomer may make a detection check, and if the successful the Referee can check the Existence Probability column to see if an object was actually detected.' delete the 'the' between 'and if' and 'successful'.
• Page 222, 'Detection Options and Conditions' table: shouldn't the DM given by Enhanced Signal Processing be larger than that given by Improved Signal Processing? Or are these cumulative, in which case it should probably be explicitly said so?
• Page 222, fourth paragraph: 'If the sensor operator wishes to determine the detect object’s vector with greater certainty, (...)' should read 'to determine the detected object's vector', not 'detect'.
• Page 223, 'Jumping to 'Empty' Hexes', first paragraph: '(...) the paucity of neutrinos emissions from ‘stars’ not fusing hydrogen (...)' neutrinos should not be pluralised in this usage.
• Page 225, 'Primordial Systems', first paragraph: the paragraph is ending on a double period.
• Page 236, 'IISS Survey Pod', second paragraph: 'It is capable of reaching orbit and descending safely to the surface of a worlds, making it an excellent lifeboat in emergency circumstances.' should read 'surface of a world', not 'a worlds'.
• Page 242, 'Hazardous Environment Exploration Boat', Armour entry: there is neither a tonnage or price associated with the 'Bonded Superdense, Amour 4', and if there was such, the design would exceed available tonnage and therefore be illegal. Delete Armour line from the ship's sheet.
• Page 243, 'Surveyor Cutter Module': Missing Power entry for Basic Ship Systems (6 power).
• Page 244, 'Accretion Disk' glossary entry: The entry fails to point out the main distinguishing trait of an accretion disk, namely that it is accreting mass onto the parent object.

---

Other than the above, there are some points and/or rules where that I didn't really understand and feel clarification is needed. I've already seen some of these being addressed in the thread, by I'll include all of them for completeness as I did above:

• Page 38, 'Terrestrial Planets' roll DMs: I don't exactly follow what the DMs mean here, namely 'If the result is 3 or more' and 'If the result is less than 3' DMs.
• Page 38, 'Single Star Systems': when I first read through this whilst trying to build a simple system, I was left wondering how many orbital slots I needed to calculate - enough to fill the system up to Orbit# 20, or equal to the number of planets? Eventually I clocked in that it was the latter, but I think it should be explicitly written down here for clarity.
• Page 57, Significant Moon Sizing: On the moon having a size exactly 2 less than its parent, a 2D roll is called for and on a 2 the moon is 1 size less than the parent and on a 12 the world is a twin world - it should probably be explicitly stated the 'otherwise, it retains its current size' somewhere here for completeness.
• Page 71: At no point is it explained what procedure should be used to determine the mass of S Size bodies.
• Page 78: At no point is it explained how to determine the composition of Trace atmospheres - personally I assume that rolling on the Exotic atmosphere tables should do the trick, but the book should address this explicitly.
• Page 184, 'T5 Cultural Expansion Conversion': If Uniqueness is directly convertible into T5's Strangeness by multiplying by ⅔, then why not do that from the get-go for this new system? That'll allow folks to read up Cx values from Travellermap.com/2nd Survey data without the need to remember that the two scales are different. Nothing is gained in keeping the current, non-multiplied form other than potential mishaps.

---

And finally, there's a few things pertaining to astronomy that I spotted that I felt I should point out;

1. Trojan Planets: Funnily enough, Planetary Systems & Orbital Mechanics is my area of emphasis at Uni, and Trojan Planets were actually the subject of my first assignment under my advisor. While this basic procedure works fine, it overlooks a tremendously important fact: there is a maximum ration between the Parent Object and the Trojan Object for the co-orbital configuration to be stable. Refer to [link] for more information.
2. 3:2 Tidal Lock: Research on tidal locking and spin-orbit resonances seem to indicate that different-ratio orbital resonances of this kind are directly linked to the body's eccentricity (see [link]), and this result on Page 105's Tidal Lock Status table should probably reflect that in some form.
3. Atmospheric Gas Retention: For the equation for gas retention, shouldn't the maximum planetary temperature be used instead of the mean? Even if the maximum temperature is only reached periodically (on say, the periapsis or during a close encounter with a distant binary or what have you), over long enough periods of time, these events would add up and during these heat flashes gases that might otherwise be bound to the planet would reach enough velocity to escape. Fast forward a billion years or so, and depletion of those gases would be noticeable. This certainly falls under the 'too much detail™' category for a routine procedure, but maybe it is worth mentioning in the text as an optional way to do it?

---

After all that, I'll once again reiterate: this is an astounding book and you've done an amazing job! Now that I've gone through the entire text and got a basic grasp of everything it puts forward, I'll start playing with the mechanics themselves and, if in the course of testing things and implementing it into Python I stumble on something that needs clarification or that seems wrong, I'll write a follow-on post.

 

[Geir]

Took me five days, but I've just finished reading the whole book front-to-back! You've done an outstanding job Mr. Lanesskog, that much is being doubt.
There are some things I'd personally would have approached differently, but they're beyond the scope of this thread and more appropriate for conversation over beers (which in the unlikely circumstance of us ever meeting, I feel is my duty to provide).

Anyway, here's everything I've noted while going through the book, starting with typos and (potential) mistakes. Some of these might have been reported already, but I'll list all of them here both for completeness and as I haven't been keeping tabs with the thread (I was busy reading )

(Obs.: If I'm not fully sure something is or isn't a mistake, it'll have a [?] beside it)

*crack of knuckles* okay here we go..

• Page 3, third paragraph, second indent: '(...) with data on Travellermap.com for the entire system to show (...)' the 'for' is stricken through.

I wrote 'in Travellermap.com on'. But 'on Travellermap.com for' does seem like a good edit - assuming the strike-through is removed from 'for'

• Page 5, 'Expanded Hex Code': '(...) numbers from 10–15 as A–F. To represent additional numbers (...)' should read 'numbers from 10–15 as A–F to represent additional numbers', as it is still the same sentence.

It's correct as is. 'hexdecimal... represents 10-15 as A-F. And then 'To represent additional numbers...' refers to numbers beyond 15 or hexadecimal F.

• Page 16, 'Peculiar Star Types', first paragraph [?]: 'A result of 2 in the Peculiar column requires more work on the part of the Referee.' should instead read 'A result of 2 in the Unusual column requires more work on the part of the Referee.' as that's what would lead the Referee to deal with the Peculiar Star Types themselves on a roll of two, surely?

Agreed. It should say 'A result of 2 on the Unusual column...'

• Page 16, 'Peculiar Star Types', sixth paragraph: 'hypothetical exotic stars (quark, strange,electroweak, dark matter,and so on)' missing a space between 'dark matter,' and 'and so on'.

Agreed. Missing space between 'dark matter,' and 'and so on'.

• Page 17, 'Unusual and Peculiar Object Mass' header: A rather 'paculiar' well of spelling peculiar.
  

Been noted, but yes: 'Peculiar'

• Page 20, 'Main Sequence Lifespan', third paragraph: 'Referee can modify these assumptions as they see fit.' should read 'The Referee can (...)'

Agreed. 'The Referee'

• Page 26, 'Fractional Orbit#s', second paragraph: 'Any Orbit#, can have add an extra D10 ÷ 100 to the result to provide a two digit fractional value.' has an extra comma between 'Any Orbit#' and 'can have'.

Agreed. no comma necessary.
Now you didn't point this out, but way back on page 4, I had written 'this book will use a lower case ‘d10’ to indicate that either method will work' but it sure doesn't look like my d10s ended up lower case. Haven't checked the whole book, the intent was that all d10 , d100 and d1000 should be lower case.

• Page 26, 'Fractional Orbit# Conversion to AU', second paragraph: 'To determine the orbital distance in kilometres, multiple by 150 million or by the more precise AU to kilometre value (...)' should read 'multiply by 150 million (...)', not multiple.

Agreed. 'multiply'

• Page 29, 'Stellar Classes and Types for Multi-Star Systems', 'Lesser': 'The lesser of a M-type star another M-type star, but (...)' is missing an 'is' between 'The lesser of a M-Type star' and 'another M-Type star'.

Agreed. An 'is' is needed.

• Page 30, second paragraph: '(...) the companion is 8:sibling; a further 1D roll (...)' missing a space between '8:' and 'sibling'.

Actually, I don't think a space is missing as much as a capital Sibling is needed, since it refers directly to the result, but a space wouldn't hurt as well.

• Page 31, 'IISS Procedural', second paragraph: '(...) as they age they emit less heat, becoming undisguisable from large gas giants (...)' should be 'indistinguishable' instead of 'undisguisable' (this word does in actuality exist, but means 'impossible to disguise', whereas the context here is about the ability to distinguish the object from gas giants).

Agreed. 'indistinguishable' is correct.

• Page 34, 'IISS Class 0/I Survery', 'Sector | Location' entry: missing a space between 'Storr' and the vertical slash '|'.

Agreed. Missing space.

• Page 42, last paragraph: 'Convert the above AU values into Orbit#s results in the following:' should read 'Converting the above AU (...)'.

Agreed. 'Converting'

• Page 43, 'Habitable Zone Breadth', last paragraph: '(...) for use in the Step 3d when placing of existing mainworlds in the following section.' has an extra 'of' between 'when placing' and 'existing mainworlds'.

Agreed, it reads better without the of. So: 'when placing existing mainworlds'

• Page 50, 'Anomalous Planets', first paragraph: 'The planet occupying this orbit may be a captured body, or a just world in an
  unusual orbit, (...)' while the world might very well be just, I suspect this should read 'or just a world' instead.

Agreed. 'or just a world' Justice has nothing to do with it...

• Page 52, fifth paragraph: 'The random orbit from the anomalous world has been inserted in the primary and companion stars’ Aab Orbit sequence as ‘A1’ to give (...)' surely the random orbit was inserted as 'A+' on the table, not 'A1'?

Agreed. 'A+'

• Page 55, 'Quantity of Significant Moons' DM table: 'Planet is in the adjacent to the outermost Orbit#range of a Close, Near or Far star' surely there is either an 'orbit' or 'orbital slot' missing between 'the adjacent' and 'to the outermost'?

Agreed. Insert 'orbital slot'

• Page 57, 'Significant Moon Size', third paragraph: 'For a gas giant, a roll of 6 indicates a larger moon and requires a 1D roll on the Gas Giant Special Sizing table, followed by a final roll for Size.' should read '(...) a 1D roll on the Gas Giant Special Moon Sizing table, followed (...)'.

Agreed, it's the 'Gas Giant Special Moon Sizing table' I just had to read that three times to realise the world 'Moon' was missing.

• Page 58, 'Default Moon Designations', second paragraph: 'Insignificant moons are often not initially discovered and occasional transitory.' should read '(...) discovered and occasionally transitory'.

Agreed 'occasionally'

• Page 59, 'Mainworld Candidate', sixth paragraph: 'Planet B II is a possible being 0.08 Orbit#s colder (...)' missing the word candidate between 'possible' and 'being'.

Agreed. Either change 'possible' to 'possibility' or to 'possible candidate'

• Page 62, 'Corella', third paragraph: '(...) the rest of the worlds are placed, gas giant followed by planetoid belts (...)' should be gas giants, plural.

Agreed. 'gas giants'

• Page 66, 'Corella System Overview': The planets' numbering in the diagram does not match the one given on the form on page 65.

Yeah... that's partially on me for not including AB in the names on my drawing, but what I submitted looked like this:

So it's okay in the book up to V, and then I don't now what happened. (Oh and if it has to be fixed anyway - for this and the other's (p.64 and 68) please don't put shadows on the stars - they're light sources. And the shadows on the world's don't look right either unless there's some big bright supergiant out there shining down on them.)

• Page 73, Belt Bulk, first paragraph [?]: 'Subsequent collisions cause more small bodies and the trend continues.' while technically not wrong, I think this should either be changed to '(...) collisions create more small bodies (...)' or explicitly state '(...) cause more small bodies to form (...)'.

eh. Collisions do cause more small bodies, so I think it's okay with it that way. I'm not supposed to write anything explicit. Oh wait... that was something else entirely...

• Page 75, 'Moon Orbit Limits,' first paragraph: 'The latter is a universal fixed scale he placement of moon orbits around planets of varying sizes.' ... I think it should read '(...) a universal fixed scale for the placement (...)', but currently this sentence just ain't right.

I don't know what happened there. Edit of some sort. The original sentence was:
The latter is a universal fixed scale, but the former is a flexible scale which helps with the placement of moon orbits around planets of varying sizes.

• Page 75, 'Moon Orbit Limits', fourth paragraph: 'The result of this equation is the approximate Hill sphere radius of the planet in expressed in AU.' has an extra 'in' between 'the planet' and 'expressed in AU'.

Agreed. Remove the 'in' in front of 'expressed'

• Page 76, 'Moon Orbit Deterioration', second paragraph: 'Next, determine the orbit each of the planet’s moons (...)' missing an 'of' or maybe a 'for' between 'determine the orbit' and 'each of the planet's moons'.

Agreed. Add 'for' between 'orbit' and 'each'.

• Page 87, 'Atmospheric Gas Composition Table', asterisk: '(...) but at temperatures above 900K CO will be more dominate that CH in most atmospheres.' should read '(...) more dominant than (...)'.

Agreed. Replace 'dominate' with 'dominant'

• Page 88, 'Exotic Atmosphere Profile', second paragraph: 'The retention value would need to 0.75 or 0.86, to retain oxygen or nitrogen, respectively, and higher still to retain water.' is missing a 'be' between 'would need to' and '0.75 or 0.86'.

Agreed. A 'be' before '0.75'

• Page 90, 'Corrosive and Insidious Atmosphere Profile', last paragraph: 'Next, determine the gas max that makes this world corrosive' should read 'gas mix', not 'max'.

Agreed. Replace 'max' with 'mix'

• Page 111, 'Optional Runaway Greenhouse Check', first paragraph: page reference points to this very page.

Agreed. It should reference page 79 instead.

• Page 111, 'Optional Runaway Greenhouse Check', second paragraph: missing period between '(...) Zed Aa and Ab' and 'Those two stars (...)'.

Agreed. Add period after 'Zed Aa and Ab'

• Page 116, 'Case 1: Tropical Zone', first paragraph: '(from axial tilt, although a large eccentricity could provide a season-like effects)' delete the 'a' between 'could provide' and 'season-like effects'.

Well it could either way, singular 'effect' or add the 'a'. Actually... I think it really ought to be 'could provide a seasonal-like effect.'

• Page 119, 'How Bright Is That Thing In The Sky?': 'This brightness is usually expressed terms of apparent magnitude.' missing an 'in' between 'expressed' and 'terms'.

Agreed. Add an 'in' between 'expressed' and 'terms.'

• Page 124, third paragraph: 'This example is purely based on the orbit of Aab
IV, Zed Prime’s gas giant primary and ignores and seasonal axial tilt variation'

I think what you're trying to say is that 'and ignores and' should be 'and ignores any' If so, I agree.

• Page 125, 'Gas Giant Residual Heat', last paragraph: 'Adding these te mperatures yields an e ective temperature of 256K.' extra space present.

Agreed. There is a space in the middle of 'te mperatures'

• Page 130, 'Extinct Native Sophont Existed', DM Table: 'f system age is greater than 5 Gyrs' the 'if' is missing an i.

Agreed. 'f' should be 'If'

• Page 132, Second Footnote: footnote is cut off and incomplete.

Well, actually it got moved to the bottom of the table (Undefined gravity) So the daggered footnote should be re-written:
†Assume the worst DM for gravity at the edges of a DM criteria. If gravity is not computed, use the Undefined gravity DM instead.

But... the Undefined gravity DM on the table is wrong. It should be:
DM+1 – absolute value of (6 – Size)

• Page 149, 'Additional Significant Digits': 'a Population code of 6 implies 1,000,000 – 9,999,999,999 people.' there are three more nines than there should be.

Correct: Should only be 9,999,999 (my fault, must have leaned on the keys)

• Page 149, 'Additional Significant Digits': 'A Population code 6 world with a P value of 9 and a subsequent D10 roll of 9 would have 9,900,000 people, but its P value would still be 6.' should end with 'but its Population code would still be 6.', not 'P value'.

Agreed. 'its population code would still be 6. (also my fault, must have been late in the day).
But... I really which it said 'd10' not 'D10'

• Page 152, third paragraph: the example issues a DM to the urbanization roll based on the planet's habitability rating, but this is not mentioned as a DM on the table in the previous page.

Yeah... ' That DM is from (Minimum Sustainable TL is 0-3) not (Habitability Rating) - even if that was what determined it, but that's too far a stretch, so replace '(Habitability Rating)' with '(Minimum Sustainable TL is 0-3)'

• Page 153, 'Major City Population', Case 3: 'If the result is less than 100 people, then the largest city population becomes larger of the world’s total urban population divided by 10 or just 1D+1 people.' surely "becomes the larger of"?

That's Case 1... but Agreed. For Case 1 add 'the' between 'becomes' and 'larger'.

• Page 165, 'Weapons and Armour' [?]: 'The Central Supply Catalogue provides additional guidance on permitting and restrictions of categories of weaponry,' surely this should be something like 'guidance on permissions and restrictions of categories of weaponry'?

I did mean 'permitting' as in 'do you have a permit for that fusion gun, sir?'

• Page 170, second paragraph: '(...) an immediate and permanent expulsion from world,' missing either an 'a' or 'the' between 'expulsion from' and 'world'.

Agreed. Add 'the' between 'from' and 'world'.

• Page 176, 'Non-starport hosting nation Low Common TL': surely there should also be a TLM roll as well as the DMs?

No... if we put a TLM in there, then it risks the low TL being higher than the High for that nation. Which I suppose is still a risk looking at previous entry.... I think the formula should be as is, but the Upper Bound for this category should be:
Non-starport nation High Common TL.

• Page 185, third paragraph: '(...) its leadership held at bay increasingly harsh measures.' missing either a 'by' or 'through'.

Agreed. Add 'by' between 'bay' and 'increasingly'

• Page 188, 'Gross World Product', first paragraph: 'For balkanised worlds, this value can be computed for each nation or faction for the world as a whole.' missing 'or' between 'or faction' and 'for the world'.

Agreed. Add 'or' between 'faction' and 'for'

• Page 195, third paragraph: '(...) supporting the footprint of a starship of at least 400 tons.' suggest changing to 'a starship of at least up to 400 tons' or equivalent.

No... 'At least up to' does not make sense, because want it to be at least 400. if it was 'at least up to', then the number could be read as allowing some number less than 400.

Or, to be entirely clear it could be rewritten as: supporting the footprint of a starship of 400 tons or more.

• Page 199, seventh paragraph: 'As they only produce small craft, their shipyard output is always equal to 10 times their shipyard capacity.' should probably specify that it refers to 'their shipyard build capacity'.

Agreed. Add 'build' between 'shipyard' and 'capacity'.

• Page 211: Misplaced ':' between Total and Urbanisation% boxes.

Yeah, that should be deleted

• Page 214: Missing 'PCR' block and figure.

I see 'PCR: 3' on page 214. Are you referring to a different page?
The forms are... not entirely stable, so the PCR seems to move from page to page.

• Page 221, 'Detection': '(...) a sensor operator or astronomer may make a detection check, and if the successful the Referee can check the Existence Probability column to see if an object was actually detected.' delete the 'the' between 'and if' and 'successful'.

I think something got edited out there. The sentence was:
Once the indicated number of points is accumulated, a sensor operator or astronomer may make a detection check roll (see below), and if the check is successful, the referee can check the Existence Possibility column to see if an object was actually detected.

I think the (see below) was removed along with a little too much else. The (see below) is actually still valid, since the description of the check is still a couple of paragraphs beyond this point.

• Page 222, 'Detection Options and Conditions' table: shouldn't the DM given by Enhanced Signal Processing be larger than that given by Improved Signal Processing? Or are these cumulative, in which case it should probably be explicitly said so?

My bad. Improved Signal Processing should be DM+1 and Enhanced Signal Processing should be DM+2.

• Page 222, fourth paragraph: 'If the sensor operator wishes to determine the detect object’s vector with greater certainty, (...)' should read 'to determine the detected object's vector', not 'detect'.

Agreed. Change 'detect' to 'detected'

• Page 223, 'Jumping to 'Empty' Hexes', first paragraph: '(...) the paucity of neutrinos emissions from ‘stars’ not fusing hydrogen (...)' neutrinos should not be pluralised in this usage.

Agreed. Change 'neutrinos' to 'neutrino'

• Page 225, 'Primordial Systems', first paragraph: the paragraph is ending on a double period.

Agreed. remove second period.

• Page 236, 'IISS Survey Pod', second paragraph: 'It is capable of reaching orbit and descending safely to the surface of a worlds, making it an excellent lifeboat in emergency circumstances.' should read 'surface of a world', not 'a worlds'.

Agreed. Change 'worlds' to 'world'

• Page 242, 'Hazardous Environment Exploration Boat', Armour entry: there is neither a tonnage or price associated with the 'Bonded Superdense, Amour 4', and if there was such, the design would exceed available tonnage and therefore be illegal. Delete Armour line from the ship's sheet.

The armour actually comes from the Pressure hull (new HighGuard page 43 and I think it originally came from the Great Rift set), which gives it Armour 4, and it has to be something , so at TL15, bonded superdense is the logical choice. The pressure hull actually adds 6 tons (25% of 24 tons) - see the top line. Not sure I like how the Pressure hull thing is implemented, but that's the way it is and I don't see a better method.

• Page 243, 'Surveyor Cutter Module': Missing Power entry for Basic Ship Systems (6 power).

No actually... see the description: It is not intended to operate independently from its cutter, and if detached life support is very limited while sensors are operating.
It is getting life support from the cutter, not the module while attached.

• Page 244, 'Accretion Disk' glossary entry: The entry fails to point out the main distinguishing trait of an accretion disk, namely that it is accreting mass onto the parent object.

Picky... and not necessarily entirely correct for a protostar, since some of the material will accrete into new planets. So let's leave it alone.

---

Other than the above, there are some points and/or rules where that I didn't really understand and feel clarification is needed. I've already seen some of these being addressed in the thread, by I'll include all of them for completeness as I did above:

• Page 38, 'Terrestrial Planets' roll DMs: I don't exactly follow what the DMs mean here, namely 'If the result is 3 or more' and 'If the result is less than 3' DMs.

That's being addressed see some entry above this one (getting late now, so I might get a little curt, but I want to finish and hit reply before I fall over)

• Page 38, 'Single Star Systems': when I first read through this whilst trying to build a simple system, I was left wondering how many orbital slots I needed to calculate - enough to fill the system up to Orbit# 20, or equal to the number of planets? Eventually I clocked in that it was the latter, but I think it should be explicitly written down here for clarity.

Actually it's the former, since you haven't determined the number of planets yet. That's the next chapter.

• Page 57, Significant Moon Sizing: On the moon having a size exactly 2 less than its parent, a 2D roll is called for and on a 2 the moon is 1 size less than the parent and on a 12 the world is a twin world - it should probably be explicitly stated the 'otherwise, it retains its current size' somewhere here for completeness.

Agreed. The whole thing should read:
If any Terrestrial world’s moon has a Size of exactly 2 less than its parent body, roll 2D and on a result of 2 the moon is just 1 Size less than the parent and on a 12, the moon is a twin world of identical Size to its primary world, otherwise it retains its current size.

• Page 71: At no point is it explained what procedure should be used to determine the mass of S Size bodies.

"or as world diameter in kilometres divided by 12,742" meaning, you need to determine its actual km size (see page 70), then you can proceed.

• Page 78: At no point is it explained how to determine the composition of Trace atmospheres - personally I assume that rolling on the Exotic atmosphere tables should do the trick, but the book should address this explicitly.

Trace is trace. It can be all over the place, I suppose some Traces could be rather transitory. Nope. Didn't cover it. Probably should have. I don't think anyone else has. Exotic might do the trick, using the gas table to see what can be retained, assuming it is a permanent atmosphere. Then comes fun questions like, can a trace have taint? Nah. Maybe it needs a JTAS article.

• Page 184, 'T5 Cultural Expansion Conversion': If Uniqueness is directly convertible into T5's Strangeness by multiplying by ⅔, then why not do that from the get-go for this new system? That'll allow folks to read up Cx values from Travellermap.com/2nd Survey data without the need to remember that the two scales are different. Nothing is gained in keeping the current, non-multiplied form other than potential mishaps.

Because I wanted things that ranged from 1-15 not 1-10, so it matched the hex range of everything else.

• And finally, there's a few things pertaining to astronomy that I spotted that I felt I should point out;
  
  1. Trojan Planets: Funnily enough, Planetary Systems & Orbital Mechanics is my area of emphasis at Uni, and Trojan Planets were actually the subject of my first assignment under my advisor. While this basic procedure works fine, it overlooks a tremendously important fact: there is a maximum ration between the Parent Object and the Trojan Object for the co-orbital configuration to be stable. Refer to [link] for more information.

Yeah, I read that somewhere, after I submitted my document. Personally I don't think trojan planets hare going to be long-term stable in any system, but I left them in, because there're mentioned in other Traveller stuff. (FYI, the only reason I 'believe' in the theory that most of Saturn's moons are fairly young, is because there are trojans. I don't think they'd last a billion years without being disrupted.

• 1. 3:2 Tidal Lock: Research on tidal locking and spin-orbit resonances seem to indicate that different-ratio orbital resonances of this kind are directly linked to the body's eccentricity (see [link]), and this result on Page 105's Tidal Lock Status table should probably reflect that in some form.

Agreed. Didn't want to go down that complexity route. And none of it really explains Venus, which is almost locked, upside down and generally nasty. But has a nice circular orbit.

• 1. Atmospheric Gas Retention: For the equation for gas retention, shouldn't the maximum planetary temperature be used instead of the mean? Even if the maximum temperature is only reached periodically (on say, the periapsis or during a close encounter with a distant binary or what have you), over long enough periods of time, these events would add up and during these heat flashes gases that might otherwise be bound to the planet would reach enough velocity to escape. Fast forward a billion years or so, and depletion of those gases would be noticeable. This certainly falls under the 'too much detail™' category for a routine procedure, but maybe it is worth mentioning in the text as an optional way to do it?

Too much detail. I actually messed with the ratios to the point where there is a little more gas escape than the actual equations, but I never could find a solid term dealing with timescales. That also goes for orbital locking, by the way. Older systems are going to lock planets further out, but I didn't want to go there. I just added a drag for age.

• ---

  
  After all that, I'll once again reiterate: this is an astounding book and you've done an amazing job! Now that I've gone through the entire text and got a basic grasp of everything it puts forward, I'll start playing with the mechanics themselves and, if in the course of testing things and implementing it into Python I stumble on something that needs clarification or that seems wrong, I'll write a follow-on post.

Thanks.
I know it's not perfect (even with corrections) but it's at least plausible to do with dice. If I wanted to do a better job, I'd iterate the system every 10 or 100 million years... but that's programming, not dice rolling. Where I'm weak is in the chemistry. I added the thing about carbon monoxide, but there are likely other chemical interactions which prevent certain gases from remaining in the atmosphere in certain combinations or conditions.

Thank you for your efforts. Now it's time for me to finish my drink and go to bed.

 

[Sigtrygg]

Now you see why I suggested a dedicated forum...

 

[MongooseBella]

Thank you!
I'll have to defer to Mongoose management on the forms question, though I was hoping for at least fillable PDF forms and a forms sheet pack (digital or physical or both) would be a great idea as well.

As for the economic extensions they start with material are taken from T5, which I suppose might have been T4-based - I'd have to go back and look. Then I added some stuff from Trillion credit squadron (the MgT1 version) and GURPS Traveller's Far Trader WTN codes and finished it off with some real-world-ish stuff for the equality and development numbers. And then tariffs. Far Trader tried to go down what looked like an income tax route with taxes, and I can't see how that's workable in Traveller (Can I right off the hull damage I got while fleeing the revenue cutter? With a really good accountant maybe I could, but adventures in accounting don't make for interesting adventures) and so just worked taxation in as tariffs on imports.

I'll ask Sandrine when I drop off the corrections

 

[Geir]

Adding another one from the other thread:
table on page 40:
MAO, not MOA

(I feel like I need a little red book - sorry, History humor there)

 

[harunmushod]

My fourth query (first three are in the The World Builder's Handbook - It Is Here! thread before I realised this thread existed. In the two instances where Geir agreed a change was needed, it is reflected in earlier posts on this thread).

p.48 STEP 5: DETERMINE SYSTEM SPREAD. in a multi-star system, do I calculate the system spread for a secondary star using the baseline orbit# that, in my personal example that I've been using to try out this book, was determined for the system by (p.46) STEP 3D: PLACING EXISTING MAINWORLD AT THE BASELINE ORBIT (CONTINUATION METHOD ONLY) and used to place the mainworld in the baseline orbit# around the primary star? Or should I go back to recalculate the baseline orbit# for the secondary star using one of the other options under step 3 (as the mainworld is not an issue for placing orbits around the secondary star)?

Is the book sufficently clear on this point - I mean I obviously think it isn't, but I accept that might just be me. Could you point out to me where it is explained, or if you accept it isn't sufficiently well explained, accept this as feedback for change?

Personally, I'm guessing what's missing is an instruction under Step 3 that the baseline orbit calculation needs to be redone using one of the four subsystems under step 3, for each secondary system. My other point then would be why should one assume the main world is orbiting around the primary star? I guess the answer the answer to that is you can't, and the referee should decide which star the main world orbits.

 

[Geir]

My fourth query (first three are in the The World Builder's Handbook - It Is Here! thread before I realised this thread existed. In the two instances where Geir agreed a change was needed, it is reflected in earlier posts on this thread).

p.48 STEP 5: DETERMINE SYSTEM SPREAD. in a multi-star system, do I calculate the system spread for a secondary star using the baseline orbit# that, in my personal example that I've been using to try out this book, was determined for the system by (p.46) STEP 3D: PLACING EXISTING MAINWORLD AT THE BASELINE ORBIT (CONTINUATION METHOD ONLY) and used to place the mainworld in the baseline orbit# around the primary star? Or should I go back to recalculate the baseline orbit# for the secondary star using one of the other options under step 3 (as the mainworld is not an issue for placing orbits around the secondary star)?

Is the book sufficently clear on this point - I mean I obviously think it isn't, but I accept that might just be me. Could you point out to me where it is explained, or if you accept it isn't sufficiently well explained, accept this as feedback for change?

Personally, I'm guessing what's missing is an instruction under Step 3 that the baseline orbit calculation needs to be redone using one of the four subsystems under step 3, for each secondary system. My other point then would be why should one assume the main world is orbiting around the primary star? I guess the answer the answer to that is you can't, and the referee should decide which star the main world orbits.

Maybe skipping too much sleep this week is making me a little groggy, but let me make sure I understand the scenario:

In you example system, you've used the continuation method to place planet in the baseline orbit# (whose location is forced by the preexisting world and its climate). So you have an orbital location, based on whatever temperature range is appropriate for the pre-existing world, and a computed (Step 1) baseline number for it, so there is one less then the baseline number of orbit# to allocate inside this mainworld orbit#. The Spread for this star would be as determined by the Spread formula on page 48, potentially adjusted by the Maximum Spread formula on page 48.

Now are you asking if this Spread number applies to other stars in the system or whether it needs to be recalculated for each Secondary star (or Secondary and Companion pair)?

Well, it depends on whether you want to use the Optional Rule on page 49 (the first column optional rule, still under Step 5.) If not, then the Spread you've calculated for the Primary star applies to every Secondary star or secondary star and companion pair.

If you do want to use the optional rule, then your assumption that you would need to go back to previous steps is correct. But you'd want to step further back to each star or star pair and create a separate baseline number - this can get hairy, because you could start getting into situations where, for instance, the baseline number for this secondary set of orbits is, so low that kicks out all the orbits into unallowable regions. That's why the equation at the top of page 49 is there - Maximum Secondary Spread = ... This will force those orbits into the space available. Which is why I'd be careful recomputing this (plus, what is your definition of 'total worlds' now for the purpose of the DM? - I could argue that one both ways, but it is safer to use the system's total world, not the secondary's).

So that optional rule to recompute multiple baseline numbers and then spreads is hard to handle programmatically (especially in a spreadsheet). Best to stick with keeping the computed primary spread and modifying it down to a maximum secondary spread if necessary. The optional rule is fine for bespoke, hand crafted systems, but it introduces too many contingencies.

Short answer: Use the same Spread for all stars or star pairs, limited by the Maximum Secondary Spread formula if necessary.

As for the question on whether the continuation method forces the planet to be in orbit around the primary star, it doesn't, but you're right it isn't clearly indicated anywhere and the procedures are focused on placing the existing mainworld in relation to the habitable zone of the primary star Orbit#. Doing otherwise makes it more art than science, meaning a heavy use of Rule 0 might be necessary. First, you have to make sure the orbit supporting the proper climate fits for that star. (this is also true for the primary star if a secondary star disrupts the habitable zone). If not, you need to move stars around to make it work the way you want to. There is a risk, especially in multi-star systems that no star can support a habitable zone planet, but if you start with such a beast, it has to go somewhere, so something has to shift.

The baseline number is really meant to to determine the spread for the primary star and in many instances, the primary star is going to have the bulk of the planets. If the secondary is at a far location, you can treat primary and secondary fairly independently, divide the worlds as indicated in Step 1, and then move through the steps 2+ for each star's worlds. That's essentially using that optional rule, going back to Step 1 for each star/star pair.

I allowed myself an out with a statement on page 45: In the continuation method, if that placement is unacceptable because of a known
mainworld environment, the Referee may need to move stars to different Orbits#.

That's a lot of typing and maybe not exactly what you're asking, so feel free to continue to as clarifying questions. And I'll try to think and communicate clearly.