[DL] Mallory Harlequin; hmmm just doesn't have the same ring to it....

["Jeff Shoffner" <shoffner@esper.com>]

Okay, I got my digest this morning; cute

><character>
>
>From:  Captain S. Mallory, The Consortium, Gloom
>To:    David Harlequin, Harlequin Velocipedes, Gloom
>Date:  August 25, 1877
>
>Dear Sir,
>
>     Your innovative velocipede designs have recently
>come to my attention.  As the inventor of the original
>design, now owned and sold by Smith & Robards of
>Gloom, I would like to introduce myself to you.
>Perhaps our mutual love of the speed and durability of
>this vehicle can benefit us both.  My organization is
>itself in the process of developing a divergent
>velocipede design, although I hurry to point out our
>two designs as of yet do not overlap.  While your
>models appear to me geared towards the sale to those
>adventuring types who flock to our fair city in search
>of scientific solutions to their many and sundried
>problems, my newest model addresses the specific
>weight and shock absorption needs of our resident
>augmented residents.
>
>     I have heard of your unfortunate copyright suit
>troubles with the purchaser of my original design, and
>wish to assure you I have no such intents.  My
>organization develops their range of products
>independant of Smith & Robards, although we do
>occasionally sell to them.  Perhaps we can meet to
>compare designs at some mutually available time.  I
>look forward to a response at your earliest
>convenience.
>
>Sincerely,
>
>S. Mallory
>
></character>


<pseudo character>

David Harlequin Motorworks Company
Aug. 28, 1877

Dear Capt. Mallory;

No problem.  I figured it was just that tinhorn British tightwad trying to
squeeze every penny he could get.  Glad to hear you don't work for him.

I don't have a problem with sharing technology or ideas with others building
velocipedes, but only as long as they don't sell them to Robards.  Your
problem of designing a 'pede for a scrapper sounds intriguing; stop by the
shop if you want and I'll be glad to show you around, and we can share some
stories.

As for something that might help you with your new 'pede designs, one of my
boys has come up with a new wheel design that uses pressurized air to give
the rubber tire some shock absorbancy--we're currently in the process of
obtaining a copyright for the design in both the USA and CSA, as well as
here in Deseret.  I'm also been toying with the idea of using this
"pneumatic" concept in a set of pistons for shock absorbtion as well, but
having a little trouble in the testing phase.

(signed)

David Harlequin

</pseudo character>



>> 'pede which is 3 (pg. 57 S&R).  I had initially saw
>> the Big Dawg as having a Turn TN of 7, but a steam
>> wagon has one of 5,

>
>I can see it either way - after all, the steam wagon
>does have four wheels to work with, whereas the Big
>Dawg's three wheel design could make three-point turns
>difficult, especially at the high speeds TN's are used
>for.  Like the book says, if you've got all afternoon
>you'll eventually get the vehicle where you want,
>without any rolls.


You do bring up a point; what with that little front wheel out there trying
to turn the entire 'pede, maybe it should be more of a TN of 7.  Can't
really lean it to the side to turn like other 'pedes.  Well, like I said,
this whole exercise was done spur of the moment.



>
>> The Fuel rates were taken in consideration with...'pede consumed 1 lb
>> of ghost rock for every 100 miles. ...

>
>That would be *ahem* me, and the response was from my
>Marshall.  The standard design has a fuel rate of 1/2,
>meaning 200 miles per core.

Oh.  Well, I guess we'll have to change that too.



>> the fuel just heats water; the steam that drives
>> the wheels can be great or small.)
>
>*sigh*  Don't get me started on the limitations of
>steam power for fast and effecient vehicle power...


Oh?  Are you a member of the Steam Power Society?  :-)



[snip] Roll Over stunt

>Do you use that rule, by the way, or do you waive it
>and just keep piling on the +2's for each additional
>45 degrees to the turn?


I'd have to say that if a rider successfully pulls off a Roll Over manuever,
then he could spin it around as much as he wants.  Hmmmm, maybe these little
Dawg tricks I'm coming up with should be a separate skill that can be linked
to Driving: velocipede.  Kind of like Gunplay for messing around with
pistols.  Either that, or just consider the rider's Driving skill to be what
you roll to successfully do these tricks.


>
>> Hmmmm, maybe a new trick:  The "Lie Down"  'pede
>> rider leans the vehicle on one side, & kicks the
>> back wheel towards the front, bringing the whole
>> thing sliding to a dead stop perpendicular to the
>> direction it was travelling.
>
>Sounds good; how many actions, target number, ...?



Okay, now you got me thinking of various Dawg tricks (bad pun intended) that
need to be written up.  Let's see, we got the Roll Over, the Lie Down, I'm
thinking of "Beg" (a biker wheelie), "Heel" (hmmm, not sure what'd that be),
"Stay" (I'm thinking a hard braking manuever), and "Up!" (jumping)

Jeff S