Altering the World Creation Tables

[creativehum]

I know many people have many different opinions on how the World Creation rolls are wrong-wrong-wrong and produce intolerably illogical results.

This thread is not about that.

This thread asks:

Have people jurry-rigged the tables in any way when rolling for the characteristics of a world (by putting caps on the die rolls, altering the DMs for the roll, or altering the results on the table itself.)

If so, what effect were you going for? What alterations did you make? How did it pan out?

Thanks!

 

[aramis]

I know many people have many different opinions on how the World Creation rolls are wrong-wrong-wrong and produce intolerably illogical results.

This thread is not about that.

This thread asks:

Have people jurry-rigged the tables in any way when rolling for the characteristics of a world (by putting caps on the die rolls, altering the DMs for the roll, or altering the results on the table itself.)

If so, what effect were you going for? What alterations did you make? How did it pan out?

Thanks!

My mods are in my MGT stuff on my website; link in signature. Look for the Elestrial Concordat World Generation.

The results are pretty nice, but I've always been a "build with Bk 6" kind of guy.

 

[mike wightman]

My most used mod is to roll the physical stats as one data set, then roll the society stats.

I then match them up the way I want and that makes the most sense to me.

Starport and TL are the last things I work out.

 

[Timerover51]

Somewhere on another thread I posted mine, but I got my LBB 3 book, Worlds out. I generally roll for the 3 primary planet characteristics first: Size, Atmosphere, and Hydrographics. For the last, do not forget to use 2D6-7+ATMOSPHERE, not planet size again. Based on those, I adjust die roll modifiers for Space Port, population, government, and Tech Level.

Vacuum, trace, very thin, and all tainted atmospheres add 3 to the Tech Level roll, and a minus 1 to the population roll. Taints always subtract 1 from the population roll. Exotic atmospheres subtract 2 from population and add 3 to Tech Level roll. Corrosive and Insidious Atmosphere add 4 to Tech Level Roll, which must be at least 9, and subtract 4 from population roll.

For Starports, I tend to look at the planet's habitability and population. A near-Terran planet with at least a 6 for population will have an A or B star port for the most part, unless you decide otherwise based on what you want. If a Balkanized government is rolled, and population is say 8 or larger, then an A or B main star port and as many C star ports as you have principal nations. Populations of 4 and 5 get a C-class port, but maybe get a D at times depending on the Tech Level, lower Tech Level gets a D. Taints and bad atmospheres lower the star port level as well.

Smaller population worlds on not really habitable planets, like vacuum to very thin with a taint, or more exotic atmosphere are likely to be company planets, going after a specific resource, colony planets for the same aim or as forced colonists to get rid of problems, or what I call founded by the Utopians, similar to the Utopian colonists that were founded in the US in the mid-1800s. Religious colonies would come under that, but I would not limit them to religious only.

Basically, I go with the nicer planets have larger populations, a wider government and law level range, and better star ports. Asteroids Belts are the wild card, but must have at least a 9 or higher Tech Level, population might cap out at 7, and multiple star ports. They could easily be Balkanized.

 

[Frankymole]

Somewhere on another thread I posted mine, but I got my LBB 3 book, Worlds out. I generally roll for the 3 primary planet characteristics first: Size, Atmosphere, and Hydrographics. For the last, do not forget to use 2D6-7+ATMOSPHERE, not planet size again.

Was that wrong is some published version of the rules?

 

[mike wightman]

I don't know if wrong is the right word to use.

In some editions they use +atmo in some the use +size.

From a scientific view arguments can be made for either to be correct.

 

[salochin999]

I know many people have many different opinions on how the World Creation rolls are wrong-wrong-wrong and produce intolerably illogical results.

This thread is not about that.

This thread asks:

Have people jurry-rigged the tables in any way when rolling for the characteristics of a world (by putting caps on the die rolls, altering the DMs for the roll, or altering the results on the table itself.)

If so, what effect were you going for? What alterations did you make? How did it pan out?

Thanks!

I've done this a few times over the years and similar to others
- physical stats first
- roll population modified by physical stats
- TL and star port last

The basic idea being to make it more consistent and logical. I like it for non-OTU space especially early exploration etc where there are no ancients or seeding and more unique sentient species.

However although I originally did this for the OTU I found I much prefer the more random world generation for the OTU because every bit of apparent illogic creates the potential for a unique planet.

If I did one for the OTU now I'd add more layers of randomness rather than less.

One example of the difference in approach is in my logical world gen I'd have similar rules as timerover regarding TL and atmosphere so bad atmospheres would get higher TL.

However using the more random OTU version I'd say if TL is too low for for the atmosphere then -> alien species or modified humans or a decaying colony that lives underground supported by tech they no longer understand or etc.

Hundreds of possibilities.

 

[Timerover51]

I've done this a few times over the years and similar to others
- physical stats first
- roll population modified by physical stats
- TL and star port last

The basic idea being to make it more consistent and logical. I like it for non-OTU space especially early exploration etc where there are no ancients or seeding and more unique sentient species.

However although I originally did this for the OTU I found I much prefer the more random world generation for the OTU because every bit of apparent illogic creates the potential for a unique planet.

If I did one for the OTU now I'd add more layers of randomness rather than less.

One example of the difference in approach is in my logical world gen I'd have similar rules as timerover regarding TL and atmosphere so bad atmospheres would get higher TL.

However using the more random OTU version I'd say if TL is too low for for the atmosphere then -> alien species or modified humans or a decaying colony that lives underground supported by tech they no longer understand or etc.

Hundreds of possibilities.

I will admit that trying to come up with somewhat rational explanations of some of the OTU worlds does force me to get quite creative. Just depends on how creative I have to get as to whether or not something in the World UPP gets changed.

 

[salochin999]

I will admit that trying to come up with somewhat rational explanations of some of the OTU worlds does force me to get quite creative. Just depends on how creative I have to get as to whether or not something in the World UPP gets changed.

Yeah. I change the stats if I can't think of anything.

 

[creativehum]

I will admit that trying to come up with somewhat rational explanations of some of the OTU worlds does force me to get quite creative. Just depends on how creative I have to get as to whether or not something in the World UPP gets changed.

Yeah. I change the stats if I can't think of anything.

Of course, as Hans has pointed out, that exactly what the Classic Traveller rules tell you to do...

At times, the referee (or the players) will find combinations of features which may seem contradictory or unreasonable. Common sense should rule in such cases; either the players or referee will generate a rationale which explains the situation, or an alternative description should be made.

Book 3, Worlds and Adventures
p. 8, '77. p. 7, '81.​

 

[creativehum]

I was poking around at some UWPs last night and remembered the biggest "problem" I had with them years ago when I first picked up my boxed Traveller from the Compleat Strategist...

I fall into a rabbit hole on each world. Like, I really sit there staring at the numbers, imagining permutations and possibilities as if I was going to write a novel set on that world or set an entire campaign on that world. Not only because, in my view, each world should be rich in situation and possibility. But because a lot of the worlds should really be quite exotic and strange with their own SF feel and vibe and potential.

And then I think how I'll be doing this for all the worlds to come that I'll need to sort out and this kind of fatigue kicks in!

 

[Timerover51]

I was poking around at some UWPs last night and remembered the biggest "problem" I had with them years ago when I first picked up my boxed Traveller from the Compleat Strategist...

I fall into a rabbit hole on each world. Like, I really sit there staring at the numbers, imagining permutations and possibilities as if I was going to write a novel set on that world or set an entire campaign on that world. Not only because, in my view, each world should be rich in situation and possibility. But because a lot of the worlds should really be quite exotic and strange with their own SF feel and vibe and potential.

And then I think how I'll be doing this for all the worlds to come that I'll need to sort out and this kind of fatigue kicks in!

It would appear that we suffer from a similar malady then. I had the same reaction, and still do.

 

[creativehum]

The solution, as I've learned (with harsh failures) over the years, it to start with a manageable amount. In my view, there's no point in generating all the details about two subsectors or more worth of detailed worlds if you still have no idea what is going to catch the players' fancy.

For examples, the post-Fifth Frontier Ward Gemma Quadrant of the Spinward Marches is ripe for all the frontier and political escapades I could possibly want. And then, we zoom in on District 268. And then we zoom in further on the Bowman Cluster.

Parsecs away a section of the Sword Worlds has been annexed by the Imperium. We've got cold-war and corporate war taking place between Sword World and Imperial interests that can spill into the closure. Across the subsector we've got Imperial nobles laying the groundwork for the own ascension to power in an as-yet claimed area of space. We've got frontier worlds at below Imperial Average Tech which allows opportunities for the PCs to slip in and get things done. We've got worlds with no cultural or political ties to the Imperium and who might well wish to remain independent which allows for plenty of cross-fire and conflicts of interest in several directions.

All of that means that the ten or so worlds of the Bowman Cluster should be able to provide weeks and weeks of play without sweating it. All of the play will have the broader Subsector and Quadrant politics and conflicts baked into them, suggesting the worlds beyond that we can build at as needed as the Players pick their future directions.

The thing I always have to keep in mind (and I forget about this with Traveller) is that I'm a PC-focused GM. I don't need the entire Imperium. I need enough of the Imperium -- just enough context -- to provide a crucible for the PCs to have a ton of adventures. And ten worlds is more than enough to get us going.

Edit to Add:

in the mix of all that, the missing ingredient to be added: Why does the Bowman Cluster matter in a specific, compelling way? What is happening there, what is available there, what is the mystery or resource or unexpected geographical game changer that makes this cluster of stars significant enough to the political and industrial players in the area. The answer to this question might not even be apparent at first to the movers and shakers of District and Gemma quadrant -- nor even the Player Characters. But there should be something there that makes the stakes the Player Characters put down in the Cluster even more valuable and consequential than expected.

 

[salochin999]

The solution, as I've learned (with harsh failures) over the years, it to start with a manageable amount.

...

a PC-focused GM

Yes, I like the players to decide the direction so (for me) just one sub-sector at a time with a short three-line ish hook/description per system in advance and add the rest as they move around.

 

[Frankymole]

I don't know if wrong is the right word to use.

In some editions they use +atmo in some the use +size.

From a scientific view arguments can be made for either to be correct.

Don's errata says that the +atmo is correct and the +size was an error (see Book 6: Scouts errata in the CT errata compendium); there are also DMs based on certain atmo ratings.