Was it something I said? ewan@xxxxxx (14 Oct 2022 13:21 UTC)
(missing)
Re: [TML] Was it something I said? Phil Pugliese (14 Oct 2022 17:15 UTC)
Re: [TML] Was it something I said? Mark Urbin (14 Oct 2022 18:28 UTC)
Re: [TML] Was it something I said? Phil Pugliese (14 Oct 2022 19:07 UTC)
Re: [TML] Was it something I said? Evyn MacDude (14 Oct 2022 19:56 UTC)
Re: [TML] Was it something I said? Thomas RUX (14 Oct 2022 20:08 UTC)
[TML] Question about OTU star density [Loooong - sorry!] Bill Rutherford (15 Oct 2022 18:59 UTC)
Re: [TML] Question about OTU star density [Loooong - sorry!] lotions.felines0x@xxxxxx (15 Oct 2022 22:09 UTC)
Re: [TML] sparsely inhabited -> raids Alan Peery (17 Oct 2022 16:55 UTC)
Re: [TML] sparsely inhabited -> raids Ian Whitchurch (17 Oct 2022 19:53 UTC)
Re: [TML] Question about OTU star density [Loooong - sorry!] David Johnson (16 Oct 2022 01:10 UTC)
Re: [TML] Question about OTU star density [Loooong - sorry!] Bill Rutherford (16 Oct 2022 02:42 UTC)
Re: [TML] Question about OTU star density [Loooong - sorry!] Bill Rutherford (16 Oct 2022 23:23 UTC)
Re: [TML] Question about OTUstar density [Loooong -sorry!] Jonathan Clark (17 Oct 2022 05:00 UTC)
Re: [TML] Question about OTU star density [Loooong - sorry!] Bruce Johnson (18 Oct 2022 20:10 UTC)
(missing)
Re: [TML] Question about OTU star density [Loooong - sorry!] Bruce Johnson (25 Oct 2022 22:45 UTC)
Re: [TML] Question about OTU star density [Loooong - sorry!] Bill Rutherford (26 Oct 2022 20:17 UTC)
Re: [TML] Question about OTU star density [Loooong - sorry!] Bill Rutherford (19 Oct 2022 15:45 UTC)
Re: [TML] Question about OTU star density [Loooong - sorry!] Phil Pugliese (15 Oct 2022 19:30 UTC)
Re: [TML] Question about OTU star density [Loooong - sorry!] Bill Rutherford (15 Oct 2022 21:08 UTC)
Re: [TML] Question about OTU star density [Loooong - sorry!] Bill Rutherford (15 Oct 2022 23:57 UTC)

Re: [TML] Question about OTUstar density [Loooong -sorry!] Jonathan Clark 17 Oct 2022 05:00 UTC

Greg Nokes wrote:

>     Here is the blurb that I put into the intro packet for a campaign that I started last year:
>
>     "Traveller Maps are flat, even though space is three dimensional. This is an artifact of how Jump Drive works. Only certain stars are accessible via Jump Space. Jump Space is somehow tied to the galactic plane. There are many theories and conspiracies tied to this, tho common thought is that it is an artifact of the dark matter halo which surrounds the galaxy."

I like this. It ties in (via some mechanism I haven't imagined yet) with MTU handwave about the Universe being non-Einsteinian, as there *is* a privileged frame of reference, that being the distribution of matter in the observable Universe. This allows FTL travel &c.

>     Handwave handwave handwave

Absolutely!

Jonathan