Re: Supplement publication idea

John D. Hamill writes:

@:) One of the reasons people on the list post specific systems to the
@:) lists is that in the books Jon Tuffley himself explains the weapon
@:) tech he uses in the "official" universe; i.e. Beams are particle
@:) weapons.

  Well, that's true but I think it misses the point to a certain
extent.  In the same paragraph as the "Particle Accelerator" statement
it is mentioned that players can use the same weapon to represent "a
Laser, Phaser, Blaster or whatever!"

@:) From that simple statement you can project the other tech, such as
@:) screens being simple EM fields designed to disrupt incoming
@:) particle beams, which is why they don't work on solid projectiles
@:) or pulse torps. from that start you can add additional weapons
@:) (lasers and the like) because you have a starting tech point.

  I think that's all right but I don't think it's really important
what the new weapons are called as long as their rules distinguish
them significantly from the existing weapons.  Maybe you want to write
rules for a weapon that does one die of damage at any range out to 36"
and weighs as much as a B battery.  OK.  Call it a laser if you like
(and if it fits your universe) but maybe I've invented the same weapon
and called it a mustard projector - it doesn't matter.	I would hate
to see people arguing about things like "no laser could ever fire over
36 inches" or things like that.

  What I'm interested in seeing are weapons (or other) ideas that
really add something to the game.  Customization of FT to a specific
universe is interesting but I'd rather see an expansion of the types
and functions of weapons.  Jump torpedoes are an example of something
really quite new, as are the B5-style PDAF/interceptors.  These
systems can probably work in many universes and therefore I think they
would be a more valuable addition to the game than Advanced A battery
with range to 48" or the like.

-joachim