Re: Should I go for it?

M.J.Elliott@uk22p.bull.co.uk wrote:
 
> Sounds like a great idea! Naturally, I assume you will give full
credit to
> GZG for FT - this is really just a reminder to everyone that it is the
> polite thing to do. After all, its free advertising for us and the
more
> people that discover how great FT (and other GZG products) is/are the
> better for all of us!!

	But of course.	What kind of writer would I be if I didn't give
credit
where credit is due?

> As it is unlikely that I could get hold of an American publication
> (particularly a new one) here in the UK, I'd appreciate it if you
would
> email me a copy of your article in due course.

	Will do...
 
> The principle is that provided you don't start quoting wholesale from
the
> books then any articles such as the one Mark is proposing are
definitiely
> worth doing - and you get some dosh (hopefully)! Think along the lines
of
> "is it possible to play this scenario/background/modification
_without_
> buying the rulebook?" If the answer is yes, then you are on dodgy
ground. I
> think you all get the picture.
	
	  How is that possible?  I'm sure what I have in mind could be
easily
converted for "other" space combat games. (Are there any others? ;-) 
However I want to focus mainly on Full Thrust and how "low tech"
concepts can be introduced into the game.  It would go without saying
that you would need to buy the rules if you want to play.  I will be
introducing weapons and systems that will be not be in rule books, or
based on existing systems that have been modified for the purposes of
the game.  I am torn on whether or not I should introduce a "universe"
to go with these rules.  On one hand it helps give background for ther
rules and helps create scenarios to go with them.  On the other hand,
why should anyone pay attention to a background they are unfamiliar with
(i.e. one that is not based on a known sci-fi bakground like Star Trek
or B5)?  

Later,
Mark