Added Topic ?

Date sent:  14-NOV-1996 13:45:52

> It may be premature to ask, but will this list (in whatever future

Only in so much as a few initial reviews, and the occasional compare and
contrast with Full Thrust. Probably nothing in depth.

> I would assume a different resource will likely arise for Babylon 5

It may be premature to ask, but will this list (in whatever future incarnation
it takes) consider the space battle rules from The Babylon Project a suitable
topic for discussion?

I would assume a different resource will likely arise for Babylon 5 Wars.

Tom

tsmccart@ewd.dreo.dnd.ca said...
> I would assume a different resource will likely arise for Babylon 5

In fact, it has. I have a mailing list setup for the Babylon Wars beta
testers. So if you are one, please feel free to subscribe:

mail to majordomo@wraith.cs.colorado.edu

with

subscribe babylon-wars

in the body.

The list is running on a fairly wimpy machine right now, so I'd ask everyone
NOT to pile on there unless you are actually a beta tester.

> On Thu, 14 Nov 1996 tsmccart@ewd.dreo.dnd.ca wrote:

> It may be premature to ask, but will this list (in whatever future

In the forseeable future, rec.games.miniatures.misc is the best area for the
upcoming Babylon V starship game. In fact there has been a constant rumor mill
going on there for the last couple months. However, things like a good review
and conversion ideas to Full Thrust would likely be welcome. Also, discussion
of the miniatures themselves would likely be reasonable, since there are many
FT'ers that use the B5 genre.

> At 09:33 AM 11/14/96 EST, you wrote:

If it's a GZG newsgroup or this mailing list in another incarnation, I could
handle a discussion of Babylon 5 Wars as it compares to FT. However, I don't
think we should add the game to the official list of games discussed. This is
an FT mailing list, not an SF miniatures mailing list. B5 Wars, as a place for
the game's discussion, doesn't belong here any more than discussions of Silent
Death, Mayday, or SFB.

If we end up forming a rec.games.miniatures.sf newsgroup instead, it would
definitely belong there.

> At 09:33 AM 11/14/96 EST, you wrote:

Oops. I didn't quite read your comment properly. I forgot that the battle
system for The Babylon Project is being written by Jon Tuffley.

I'd wait and see what the rules looked like. If they are similar to FT, then I
can see conversion stats being used. If they are radically different, we may
want to wing it. The only risk we'll run is topic creep as other areas of the
rpg begin to get discussed (probably starting with how character skills affect
damage control, or something like that).

In message <199611141640.LAA21987@smtp1.sympatico.ca> Allan Goodall writes:
> At 09:33 AM 11/14/96 EST, you wrote:
This
> is an FT mailing list, not an SF miniatures mailing list. B5 Wars, as

I think the point was: not Babylon 5 Wars (such a snappy name) but
The Babylon Project. To refresh all, TBP is IIRC a role-playing game
with a starship combat add-on being designed by Mr J. March-Tuffley,
he of GZG.

Doubtless it will be *very* similar to FT.

We've had everyones B5 adaptions to FT coming right out of the list's
metaphorical ears... TBP will be J.M-T's adaptions. The guy who wrote
FT has been sitting down and making careful notes of what's what in B5,
presumably with help from Babylonian Productions (or whatever they are called)
to spiff FT up with. It would be, frankly, not a little bizarre not to discuss
these rules here.

It seems quite possible that TBP will pull a goodly number of new gamers into
FT... do we tell them to shut up about the related game that brought them
here? Really?

OTOH B5-Wars will almost certainly aquire it's own listserver toot
sweet, so that game can naff right off and flush it's metaphorical head.

unsubscribe jbensan@uclink4.berkeley.edu

Actually, just a note.

It's probably no secret that the Babylon Project won't be on the shelves on
schedule.

I think Chameleon Eclectic might still have it in playtest, or perhaps it's in
Warner Bros. hands, but every rumour puts it somewhere short of the printer...

Tom