Re: Points, Mass and FT3 [FAO MJE-JMT-GZG]

Adam Delafield wrote:
>
> The only thing I can see working is if Jon rationalized FT and MT
> into one book, and added more in the way of simple campaign rules,
> alien tech (perhaps for Kra'Vak, Svasku and Splaaargoids)

	The Who?  I've never heard of this bunch before (or is this some
kind
of inside joke).
> 
> >I'm not, however, too chuffed with "casemates" and "turrets".
> >Call me a maximizer, or whatever, but I'm perfectly comfortable
> >with beam weapons being 3-arc weapons first, last and always.
> >There are plenty of single-arc weapons in FT to oblige players
> >to maneuver to bring them to bear: submunitions, railguns,
> >torps, AA's, needles etc.

> And as for turrets/casemates, again it makes weapons heavier and
worse.
> I could live with it if you made casemates lighter, but the current
rules
> have no room for maneuver.
> 
> >The "A-battery problem" is solvable in a mass-driven system by
> >bumping it up to 4 mass.
> 
> The A-battery problem does not exist, and is more than taken care of
> by threshold checks, needlers etc. All IMHO 8-)

	No kidding.  I don't know what everyone's problem is with the
beam
batteries.  I am perfectly at ease with the beam rules.  

> One thing that looks like it will be in FT-III, which should make it
> worth purchasing, is a finished version of the Realistic Movement
> rules that can be found on Mark 'I'm not a Communist, honest guv'
> Seifert's web page. (Sorry Mark, couldn't help myself).

	No problem Adam, but what does any of this have to do with
Marxism?

> I'd like to see a new Full Thrust, but I'd like it to be more of the
> same, rather than a complete rewrite. I think my resistance to the
> initial idea was more to do with the fear of major revisions than
> actually not wanting a better game. Provided the core rules remain
> largely unchanged, I'll be happy with FT-III, even if the Advanced
> rules are changed beyond recognition. (I hardly use MT anyway).
> I'll probably have to redo all my playsheets though 8-(
	
	The question is if you can improve on FT without a major
rewrite.  I
don't see anything wrong with the FT aside a few minor points.	by
correcting them in a reprint or supplement, a complete new set of rules
would be unnescessary.

Later,
Mark