THE MAGAZINE OF ADVENTURE GAMING

APRIL 1981 NUMBER 38

ExpertD&D™

"THE DOUBLE-TIMING

DOUBLE-CROSSING

PICK-A-PAST PARADOX"

1980 GAME SURVEY RESULTS

INSIDE STORY!

THE COMPLAINTS

DEPARTMENT

TIME WAR

SELLING YOUR GAME ARTICLE

LORDS OF UNDEREARTH

COMBINATION GAME CONTEST

AND 7 PAGES OF REVIEWS

$2.50

USED SHIPS FOR

TRAVELLER

Publisher: Steve JacksonEditor: Forrest JohnsonArt Director: Denis LoubetContributing Editors:

William A. BartonRonald PehrNick SchuesslerBruce F. Webster

Business Manager: Elton FewellCirculation Manager: Aaron AllstonUtility Infielder: Elisabeth Barrington

THE SPACE GAMER (ISSN 0194-9977,USPS 434-250) is published monthly by TheSpace Gamer, 7207 Onion Crossing Dr., Austin,TX 78744. Second class postage paid at Austin,TX. POSTMASTER: Send address changes toThe Space Gamer, P.O. Box 18805, Austin, TX78760.

All material is copyright 1981 by The SpaceGamer. All rights reserved.

Printed in U.S.A. by Futura Press, Austin.

Subscription rates, effective 5-15-80:U.S. Canada Other foreign

One year $21 $24 $41Two years $39 $45 $79Lifetime $250 $260 N/A

All prices are in U.S. dollars; payment mustbe in U.S. dollars.

In This Issue1

NUMBER 38 — APRIL, 1981

Articles1980 GAME SURVEY RESULTS

Results of Issue 35's Annual Game Survey 8THE COMPLAINTS DEPARTMENT

What actually goes on in the TSG offices 12

SELLING YOUR ARTICLE * Lewis PulsipherHow to get the right article to the right magazine 14

THE LORDS OF UNDEREARTH * Keith GrossDesigner's notes for Metagaming's new MicroGame 16

YA WANNA BUY A USED SHIP? * Tim Brown and William A. BartonSuggestions for those who don't want (or can't afford) to buy new ones 20

COMBINATION GAME CONTESTInsane (but playable — sort of) combinations of games 22

GAME DESIGN: THEORY AND PRACTICE * Steve JacksonPart XII • Components 26

FictionTHE DOUBLE-TIMING, DOUBLE-CROSSING, PICK-A-PAST-PARADOX

* Richard KearnsHow to blow up New York when seven people aren't trying to stop you . . .4

Computer GamingDEUS EX MACHINA * Joseph Power

Random number generation 25

ReviewsTIME WAR * Forrest Johnson 7EXPERT DUNGEONS & DRAGONS * Aaron Allston 18CAPSULE REVIEWS 30

GAMES: Arena of Death, Dr. Who, Dungeon (2nd. Ed.), The Fury of the Norsemen,Kings and Castles, The Lords of UnderEarth, Space Warrior, Star Fleet Battles Designer'sEdition, Voyage of the B.S.M. Pandora, Warlock. SUPPLEMENTS: Isle of Dread, Leviathan,Security Station, Traders & Gunboats. PLA Y AIDS: The Astrogator's Chartbook, CardboardHeroes, Gorp, The Unknown Gods. MINIATURES: Wizards & Lizards. COMPUTER GAMES:Galactic Trader, Hellfire Warrior, Labyrinth, Parsector V, Slag.

DepartmentsWHERE WE'RE GOING 2GAME MASTER 3CONTEST 23REVIEWER'S GUIDE 36LETTERS 38READER ADS 39ADVERTISERS 39NEWS & PL UGS 40CALENDAR 40THE GOOD GUYS 40

ART IN THIS ISSUE: David Allee: 38; Virginia Campbell: 33; Joanie Chladek: 26; K.C.Ellis: 35; Janet Jackson: 2; Paul Jaquays: 2, 12, 13, 25; Denis Loubet: 4, 5, 16, 22; RichardMather: 20, 21; Will McLean: 30; Pat Mueller: mailer cartoon; George Pratt: cover, 18, 20;J.D. Webster: 40; Yaquinto Publications: 7. Publishers may wish to request a copy of ourRecommended Artist's list.

Our lead story is Aaron Aliston'sreview of TSR's new Expert D&D. On thewhole, he likes it. Find out why on page18.

This issue ought to be arriving on orabout April 1. That's our only excuse fora few of the other things within thesepages. It's nice to let off a little steamonce in a while!

As promised, we have the surveyresults this time. Compiling our annualsurvey becomes a more massive jobevery year. This year we used a com-puter, and still almost didn't survive.Special thanks to Elisabeth Barrington,Earl Cooley, and Mark Richmond fordesigning the program, and to Elisabeth,Denis Loubet, and Chad Irby for hoursover the CRT inputting millions ofnumbers.

Not in this issue (sorry — we lied lasttime) is the "Conan's Greatest Hits"article. The PRESTAGS variant forConan's battles doesn't yet live up toits billings.

What do you think of the gold cover?Like? Dislike? Don't care? It's anotherexperiment — if it works, we may do itagain once a year or so. Comments?

—SJ

Next IssueOur March issue will be de-

voted to computer gaming,with designer's notes by LordBritish, creator of Akalabeth;

A featured review of Stra-tegic Simulations' first sciencefiction game;

"Fantasy World," a storyby Timothy Zahn;

"Computers to Go," a mar-keting effort of special interestto garners;

Also, the winners of themagic contest;

And more than a few cap-sule reviews.

2

General status report: The next threesets of Cardboard Heroes are well along.By the time you read this, they ought tobe available — see the ad elsewhere in thisissue.

CAR WARS is coming along prettywell. We figured out a better way to dothe armor rules. Now the big problem issqueezing everything down into the pack-age. This is going to be the equivalent ofsome peoples' $6 or $7 games in a $3ziplock.

VAMPIRE (probable title unless some-thing strange happens) is taking a backseat at the moment. Too much else to do.Once the CAR WARS typeset draft isready, I'll look at VAMPIRE.

readers. While Forrest often assignsreviews to specific people, every monthwe get a number of unsolicited reviewsthat also see print. Most "feature" re-views are by assignment, but this is nota hard-and-fast rule either.

How do you insure fairness? We can't— not 100%. If and when we let a reallymessed-up review get by, we'll run acounter-opinion or a correction, as neces-sary.

But there are several things we do totry to insure fairness. First, we will re-view any computer game, SF or fantasygame or supplement, SF/fantasy minia-tures line we receive. It doesn't matter

who published it — large or small, adver-tiser or non-advertiser.

Second, reviews are based on nothingbut the product. In some hobbies (notnecessarily just gaming), there are maga-zines that review everything favorably tokeep potential advertisers happy. Thereare others that consistently puff someproduct lines and downgrade others.Sorry . . . we don't like that, and wewon't do it. Everyone will get as fairtreatment as we can manage — but if"fair" means saying that a rotten game isa rotten game, that's how it is. We under-stand that this policy is not the optimumone for collecting big advertising bucks.That's the way it goes. We'd rather thavea reputation for honesty than for alwayspulling punches and "getting along."

Third, every review we receive getssome kind of checking. If the companyhas been so kind as to send us a reviewcopy of the game, then a staff membercan check "outside" reviews against thegame. Many reviews have been rejectedat this stage because the reviewer clearlyhadn't played the game (or had played itwrong!). If we have no copy of the game,we try to find/borrow one. If that's notpossible, we tend to go on the reputationof the reviewer. With all other thingsequal, we prefer to deal with a reviewer

WHERE

WE'RE

GOING

As you probably noticed, the coverprice this issue is up to $2.50, but we'reback to 40 pages. Inflation forced theprice increase, but we can try to make upfor it by giving you more pages. (The adsin this issue, by themselves, didn't reallyjustify a 40-pager. Oh, well.) We'll keeptrying to get out 40 pages whenever wecan. If you want to help, you can buy ouradvertisers' games . . . and write to themto say you saw their ad in TSG. Adver-tisers go on results. From everything wecan find out, TSG is a good market —but the advertisers like some specificfeedback as well.

The subscription price is not going up— not right away, anyhow. So a subscrip-tion is a better deal, comparatively, thanit was. Unless the economy straightensout we'll eventually have to raise sub-scription price as well . . . but we'll holdoff as long as we can, rather than contrib-ute to the price spiral before we abso-lutely have to.

There have been a number of ques-tions about our review-everything policy(one industry magazine called it a "cru-sade"). A few questions and answers:

Who writes your reviews? Some arewritten by staff members, the rest by

we know than a newcomer. (This can beunfair to someone breaking in, and we'resorry. But the important thing to us is tomake sure that the readers get the bestinformation possible. We'll encourage anewcomer when we can — like when wehave a copy of the game, to check hiswork — in the hopes that he/she willdevelop into a "regular.") Several of ourregular reviewers live in Austin, whichmakes it much easier to check and con-sult.

Fourth, the review format itself callsfor each reviewer to make both favorableand unfavorable comments about thegame. Nothing has yet been producedthat was without flaws, or was (quite)totally worthless. A reviewer who can'tlook deeply enough to see this is likelyto get a rejection slip with the "It seemedextraordinarily biased" line checked off.

So — we can blow it on a review, butwe usually don't. Better than half of thecomplaints we get from publishers about"bad reviews" have ended with a "mygosh, it really does say that in the game,doesn't it?" letter from the company.

And we have even received complimentson unfavorable reviews — from publish-ers saying that they appreciated the com-ments and would change the game. Nowthat's the kind of publisher our hobbyneeds more of.

Why should a store carry TSG whensome of the reviews say "don't buy thisgame"? I had this question from a bigwholesaler at a convention, and it flooredme. I felt like coming back with "Whyshould a store carry a crummy game in-stead of sending it back to the whole-saler?" But I didn't — he was serious.Now it seems to me that a store wouldwant a game magazine to carry honestreviews rather than mindless praise ofeverything. That way the store-ownercould use the reviews to guide his buying.I know of several retailers, and at leastone wholesaler, who use TSG and otherreviews just that way. But I don't know.I'd like to get letters from retailers andwholesalers with their views on reviews.Do you want sugar-coating, honesty, orwhat? And why?

How do you choose games for longreviews instead of capsules? Featuredreviews — 1 or 2 pages long — are for twokinds of games: (1) a game from a majorpublisher, highly plugged, with a "bigname." This is the sort of game thateveryone will think about buying. There-fore, we run a detailed review as soon aspossible so that everyone can make uptheir minds. A perfect example is TSR'sExpert D&D, reviewed in this issue. (2) Avery good game from a minor publisher(like Eon's Cosmic Encounter, last issue)may get a featured review after it's beenout a while, just to make sure everyoneknows about it. Similarly, we'll do a fea-tured review of GDW's Triplanetary(a real SF classic, now being re-issuedafter years out of print).

Can I write a review? Do you pay?Yes, and yes. Capsule reviews pay a flat$5 if accepted. Features are a penny aword. See the writers' information in thereview section — or send a SASE for ourWriters' Guide.

—Steve Jackson

GAME MASTER

GAME MASTER exists to answerquestions on your favorite games. If youhave a rules question or play problem,send it in. Questions to be answered willbe chosen on the basis of general interest.They will be first refereed to the gamepublisher or designer. If no response isreceived, GAME MASTER will offer itsown interpretation of the rule. Sorry —no individual replies are possible.

GAME MASTER also invites publish-ers to send errata or clarifications fortheir new games, They will be printed asspace allows.

Raid on Iran

Great game . . . but why can only onegroup of Americans double move eachturn?

Also, since Iranians are alerted by thefirst normal attack, does this mean onlyone group of Iranians in a building, likethe Chancery, can ever be surprised witha +3 bonus?

—John S. Trembley

The double-move doesn't simulate anymagical ability of one batch of comman-does each turn to wear winged boots. Itis for playability and effect — it keeps the

Iranians from ever being sure just whatthe Americans are capable of If all theU.S. troops could double-move, they'dbe too powerful — and not as interesting.

Only one group of Iranians in any onebuilding will ever be attacked at the +3,but careful planning will allow the U.S.player to get the +3 two or three times inwidely separated areas.

—Steve Jackson

Star Fleet Battles

Task Force Games' Steve Cole writes:"With the aid of our computer, we use aninteresting procedure for doing erratasheets. Each time a question comes in,the memory file for that sheet is called upand the required item added. If the ques-tion came from outside, we run a print-out of the updated file and sent it to (thewriter) . . . If the game is ever reprinted,we use the errata sheet to make thechanges required."

Steve sent us the whole Star Fleet Bat-tles errata sheet for our convenience inkeeping up with questions. He suggested(and we agree) that a few of the sectionswere worth printing immediately.

32.62 The last crew unit on a shipcannot be killed by hits scored against the

;hip. (There would almost always besome survivors. )

59.421 All fighters must have theirtarget in the FA firing arc to have a "lockon" for purposes of firing or guidingcrones.

105.8 The batteries on Andromedan

ships can hold five units of power each.109.5 Hydran fusion beams are de-

stroyed on "tor p" hits.119.217 Tugs are considered to be the

same size as CA's. Pods are considered tobe "smaller ships" if detached, and partof the Tug if attached.

Ogre/G.E.V

In G.E.V. standard scenarios, can youset up your immobile CP in the lake(underwater)?

—Mark Bassett

No, CPs cannot be set up (or move)on or under water. An amphibious (orwholly 'aquatic) CP would be an interest-ing option, but I'll leave it to players tofigure it out. It should be more "expen-sive" than any regular CP.

—SJ

Regarding George Collins' rules forsolo play (TSG 35), does the Ogre have towaste a valuable missile on a mere GEV orother unit just because it's within range? Ifind that by the time the Ogre is near theCP, it's already blown its best weapons.

—Philip A. Natta

Good point. For starters, why not saythat the chance the Ogre fires a missileis equal to the number of missiles it has,divided by 6? An Ogre with 6 missileswill always fire one; an Ogre with onlyone left will fire only on a roll of 6.

—SJ